MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493178106 · doi:10.1057/9781137476104_4

Kid Vid: Children and Science Fiction TV Fandom

2014· book-chapter· en· W2493178106 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sandra Annett

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooks · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFandomVisual artsAdvertisingComicsSingingArtMedia studiesHistoryPsychologySociologyLiteratureAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

T his little ditty, sung to an upbeat tune, was a constant refrain of Saturday mornings in my childhood home. It was a “bumper,” a short segment between the program and the commercials, on the American Broadcasting Company’s Saturday morning cartoon lineup, which I eagerly tuned into on cable television in Canada in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Each bumper was a cartoon in itself, a fun five-second Claymation sight gag based on a comic reversal. I still remember laughing at the singing fire hydrant that turns the tables on a nosy dog by spraying it with water, or the cowboy who whistles for his horse only to have it fall on his head at the end of the song. With the ABC logo appearing on a red-brick wall in the background of every cartoon, these bumpers acted as station identifiers, not-so-subtle advertisements for the network. They also advertised—that is, drew attention to and made known—the fact that a commercial break was coming up. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.008

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooksSame topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207