MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765114147 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.583623

Guía Para Citar Y Referenciar. Estilo Vancouver

2016· article· es· W2765114147 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Manuel Ruiz-de-Luzuriaga-Peña

Bibliographic record

VenueE-LIS Repository (University of Naples Federico II) · 2016
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology Research and Bibliometrics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStyle (visual arts)CitationHumanitiesWriting styleArtLibrary scienceLiteratureComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Esta guía ha sido redactada para el uso de los alumnos de la Universidad Pública de Navarra en la elaboración de sus trabajos académicos, siguiendo las pautas de Citing Medicine, Citing & ReferencingVancouver Style, Vancouver Citation Style, Estilo de Vancouver, Requisitos de uniformidad para los manuscritos enviados a revistas biomédicas, Citing and Referencing: Vancouver y el estilo Vancouver del gestor bibliográfico Mendeley.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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 score0.301
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0260.062
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0180.005
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2260.165

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE-LIS Repository (University of Naples Federico II)Same topicPsychology Research and BibliometricsFrench-language works237,207