MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2479593356 · doi:10.15402/esj.v1i2.120

Conversation with Bryan Smale, University of Waterloo

2016· article· en· W2479593356 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Nazeem Muhajarine, Bryan Smale

Bibliographic record

VenueEngaged Scholar Journal Community-Engaged Research Teaching and Learning · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipConversationSociologyRecreationDisciplineSection (typography)Media studiesCommunity engagementWork (physics)Social sciencePublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Exchanges, we present conversations with scholars and practitioners of community engagement, responses to previously published material, and other reflections on various aspects of community-engaged scholarship meant to provoke further dialogue and discussion. We invite our readers to offer in this section their own thoughts and ideas on the meanings and understandings of engaged scholarship, as practiced in local or faraway communities, diverse cultural settings, and various disciplinary contexts. We especially welcome community-based scholars’ views and opinions on their collaboration with university-based partners in particular and on engaged scholarship in general. In this issue, Nazeem Muhajarine talks with Dr. Bryan Smale about his work on the Canadian Index of Wellbeing. Dr. Smale is Professor, Recreation and Leisure Studies, Faculty of Applied Health Science, University of Waterloo, and Director of the Canadian Index of Wellbeing.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0320.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0050.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.010

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 head0.187
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngaged Scholar Journal Community-Engaged Research Teaching and LearningSame topicCommunity Health and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207