MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889216301 · doi:10.22215/timreview/1176

Transdisciplinary Research in the Built Environment: A Question of Time

2018· article· en· W2889216301 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Paula Femenías, Liane Thuvander

Bibliographic record

VenueTechnology Innovation Management Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersVetenskapsrådetKungliga Tekniska HögskolanChalmers Tekniska HögskolaFedDev OntarioSvenska Forskningsrådet Formas
KeywordsDisciplineData scienceComputer scienceEngineering ethicsManagement scienceSociologyEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IntroductionTransdisciplinary research approaches have been brought forward as a means to solve and mitigate real-world problems where disciplinary and interdisciplinary research approaches fall short.

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)0.055
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.058
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0550.058
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.038
Scholarly communication0.0150.031
Open science0.0030.010
Research integrity0.0080.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
DomainMethods
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTechnology Innovation Management ReviewSame topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207