MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2367525579

Discussion on Several Relations in Early Childhood Development:0~3 Years

2006· article· en· W2367525579 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hua Aihua

Bibliographic record

VenueEarly childhood education · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild Therapy and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelation (database)Early childhoodMaturity (psychological)Developmental psychologyUnconsciousnessIntervention (counseling)PsychologyChild developmentComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contradictions exist in early childhood education. For example, should we respect or regulate the baby's simultaneous behavior? And should we conform to or promote the baby's development? Solution of the problems requires a good theoretical understanding of different relations in early childhood development, including the relation between unconsciousness and activity of early childhood development, the relation between maturity and training, and the relation between early intervention and development.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarly childhood educationSame topicChild Therapy and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207