MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2772407895

Welcome from the organizers

2012· article· en· W2772407895 on OpenAlexaff
Kenneth Hullett, David Milam, Staffan Björk, Gillian Smith, José P. Zagal, Bardia Aghabeigi, Andrea Bonanno, Alessandro Canossa, Neesha Desai, Claire Dormann, Alexandra Holloway, Dinara Moura, Mark Nelson, Malcolm Ryan, Adam M. Smith, Duane Szafron, Richard Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueFoundations of Digital Games · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman auditory perception and evaluation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of AlbertaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.014
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0070.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1450.111

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.229 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueFoundations of Digital GamesSame topicHuman auditory perception and evaluationFrench-language works237,207