MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2347049640 · doi:10.3233/sji-160993

Survey methodology for humanitarian intervention

2016· article· en· W2347049640 on OpenAlexaff
Dung Chu, Monica Dashen, M. Serrano Selva, Maria Suchowski

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical Journal of the IAOS · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicBangladesh Politics, Society, and Development
Canadian institutionsEngineers Without Borders Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntervention (counseling)Work (physics)Risk analysis (engineering)Process managementBusinessManagement scienceComputer scienceKnowledge managementOperations managementPsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Study design, from objective to implementation, determines the effectiveness of the data. This design problem is exacerbated by the specific needs of an organization and lack of information about the area. The organization and SwB members must work closely together to ensure that the study fits the purpose and meets the ultimate objective.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.073
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.130
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0730.130
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.011
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.006

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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.252 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical Journal of the IAOSSame topicBangladesh Politics, Society, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207