MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164037638 · doi:10.53841/bpslg.2006.7.2.115

Editorial: Special feature on same-sex marriage

2006· editorial· en· W2164037638 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Meg Barker, Darren Langdridge

Bibliographic record

VenueLesbian & gay psychology review · 2006
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLesbianSection (typography)PublicationFeature (linguistics)Gay rightsEvent (particle physics)LawSociologyGender studiesPsychologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyLinguisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the process of publication of this issue of Lesbian & Gay Psychology Review (June, 2005) a landmark High Court case was held in the UK involving two of the founder members of the Lesbian & Gay Psychology Section. Celia Kitzinger and Sue Wilkinson were legally married in Vancouver in 2003 and sought legal recognition of their Canadian marriage, arguing that the failure to acknowledge it is a breach of their human rights (Wilkinson & Kitzinger, 2006). It is to mark this event that we decided to publish the special feature on same sex marriage which you will find in the pages that follow.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.020

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.393 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLesbian & gay psychology reviewSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207