MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613505882

Make Write - A Zine Workshop How-to

2014· article· en· W2613505882 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mark M. Black

Bibliographic record

VenueYA Hotline · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Methods and Media Use
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCreative writingPublic relationsSociologyLibrary scienceMedia studiesPolitical scienceComputer scienceVisual artsArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this article is to demonstrate how librarians can provide a supportive environment in which youth participants can engage in creative writing. Additionally we hope that our youth participants can form collaborative partnerships with adult writers, as well as with fellow youth writers from different communities within their city. Our original aim was a proposal on how this could be achieved within the Halifax Regional Municipality, but this proposal could be applied to any Canadian municipality and their corresponding library system.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0800.034

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYA HotlineSame topicEducational Methods and Media UseFrench-language works237,207