CAQD Conference 2013. Marburg, Germany, 6-9 March 2013, Marburg Research Group for Methodology and Evaluation (MAGMA), Phillips University, Marburg
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nestled on the banks of the river Lahn in central Germany, the 15th CAQD conference was held at Marburg. A beautiful provincial town, it is one of very few that was spared the bombings of WWII; now providing the perfect backdrop for meeting to discuss developments in qualitative technology. This was the second international conference in the series with more than 140 delegates from 14 countries, including: Canada, Brazil, Portugal, the UK, as well as Germany. Hosted by MAGMA, the Marburg Research Group for Methodology and Evaluation, in partnership with Philipps-University Marburg, CAQD prioritizes a user-focus which balances practical and methodological workshops with conference presentations. © 2013 FQS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.036 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.133 | 0.037 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".