MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619611061 · doi:10.16995/dm.22

Burnard, Lou, Katherine O’Brien O’Keeffe, and John Unsworth, eds. 2006. Electronic textual editing. New York: Modern Language Association of America. vii + 419 pages + CD-ROM

2009· article· en· W2619611061 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Martin Stephen

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Medievalist · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital Humanities and Scholarship
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt historyArtLibrary scienceMedia studiesComputer scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As editors continue to transition from the production of scholarly print editions to electronic editions, we must remember the roots of our labors and frame our work by looking behind us and ahead. We must position ourselves so that we can see our editorial past and understand how the body of print knowledge informs the ever-expanding nexuses provided by electronic editing. Electronic Textual Editing serves as a watershed collection of essays that asks important questions about this shift and that offers the responses of seasoned editors of electronic editions.

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)0.012
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.013
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.029

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital MedievalistSame topicDigital Humanities and ScholarshipFrench-language works237,207