MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144131609 · doi:10.11114/ijsss.v1i2.131

The Intertwining of Disciplinary Concepts between Health Sciences and Economics

2013· article· en· W2144131609 on OpenAlex
Mohsin Khan, John Whalley

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Social Science Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyDisciplineMeaning (existential)IncentiveEpistemologyCurrencyPositive economicsSociologyEconomicsSocial scienceMicroeconomicsPhilosophyLinguisticsMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on the cross usage of terminology originating in one discipline but used in another, using economics and health sciences as our example. We highlight the use by economists of such terms as the brain, depression, and exhaustion whereas currency, elasticity, equilibrium, and optimality are all central notions in economics now being used in health sciences. We suggest that the dual usage occurs in ways where the original use and meaning of terms is not fully mirrored in their use in the other discipline. In part, this may reflect the pressures on researchers in all disciplines to be novel and innovative, and hence the incentive to adopt out of discipline terminology without full appreciation of its full meaning elsewhere. We discuss possible explanations for this characteristic of cross disciplinary use of terminology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.847
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.260
GPT teacher head0.580
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it