MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904004479 · doi:10.1080/14649357.2018.1550989

Confronting Disconnections of the Mind, Practice and Politics – Planning and Meaningful Conversation. What Role for an Academic Planning Journal on the Cusp of Its Twentieth Birthday?

2018· article· en· W2904004479 on OpenAlexaff
Heather Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenuePlanning Theory & Practice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Governance and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationPoliticsCusp (singularity)SociologyPsychologyEpistemologyCognitive sciencePolitical scienceCommunicationPhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This editorial marks a moment of transition for Planning Theory and Practice. 2019 sees the journal move from its teenage years to its twentieth year of publication. Looking back to the publication...

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)0.050
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.068
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0500.068
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0340.139
Scholarly communication0.0500.057
Open science0.0040.024
Research integrity0.0170.037
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.333 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venuePlanning Theory & PracticeSame topicHigher Education Governance and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207