MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2623939708

Toward Common Ground: Metadata Document

2017· article· en· W2623939708 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amanda Amaral, M. Robinson Kelly, Sarah Haanstra, Samantha Blostein, Karen Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLibrary Science and Information Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetadataComputer scienceInformation retrievalWorld Wide WebDatabase
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This summary provides an overview of a project conducted for the Toward Common Ground collaboration as part of a broader effort to identify indicators and measures of wellbeing for individuals in Guelph and Wellington. The Research Shop at the Community Engaged Scholarship Institute researched key indicators of wellbeing and compiled the results in a single document serving as a comprehensive source of data on measures of wellbeing in our community.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
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 score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0250.032
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0240.032
Open science0.0040.013
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.088

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicLibrary Science and Information SystemsFrench-language works237,207