MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164168532

Biological Evolution in Canadian Science Curricula

2015· article· en· W2164168532 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueReports - National Center for Science Education (U.S.) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEvolution and Science Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreationismCurriculumEnvironmental ethicsBiological evolutionPolitical scienceEpistemologyPhilosophyLawBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The social controversy around biological evolution and creationism continues to persist throughout North America (Alters and Nelson 2002; Berkman and Plutzer 2011; Moore and Cotner 2009; Wiles and Alters 2011; Winslow and others 2011; Rissler and others 2014). This fierce debate has been quite visible in the United States, but seems to be relatively muted in Canada, which may lead many to believe that the dispute does not exist north of the border. While this issue has been researched and documented thoroughly in the US, relatively little is known about its dynamics in Canada, despite the powerful presence of such controversies there (Wiles and others 2005).

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.257 · 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