MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2857633610 · doi:10.4309/jgi.2018.38.15

Erratum to: Multi-Venue Self-Exclusion for Gambling Disorders: A Retrospective Process Investigation

2018· erratum· en· W2857633610 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dylan Pickering, Alex Blaszczynski, Sally Gainsbury

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gambling Issues · 2018
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyOrder (exchange)Process (computing)Computer scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Erratum to: Multi-Venue Self-Exclusion for Gambling Disorders: A Retrospective Process Investigation Originally published in JGI Online First section, Issue 38, Month 2018 DOI:http://dx.doi.org/xxx-xxxx-xxThere were errors in several values listed in Figure 5 under the subheadings “Abstinent” and “Non-abstinent.” Further, the order of these subheadings was reversed. The correct table is shown in the current version of the manuscript.Corrected version may be found in JGI, Issue 38, May 2018 DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.4309/jgi.2018.38.7

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.152
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.152
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.013

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gambling IssuesSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207