MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2905593933 · doi:10.1080/13876988.2018.1551598

Methodological Challenges for Comparative Welfare State Research: Capturing Intra-Country Variation in Cross-National Analyses

2018· article· en· W2905593933 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rossella Ciccia, Jana Javornik

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Policy Analysis Research and Practice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsQueen's UniversityQueen's University BelfastEuropean Commission
KeywordsVariation (astronomy)Welfare stateWelfareComparative researchState (computer science)Cross countryPolitical scienceRegional scienceEconometricsEconomicsComputer scienceGeographyDemographic economicsSociologySocial scienceLawPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scholars of welfare state and public policy have repeatedly emphasized the value and need for comparative approaches (Engeli and Rothmayr Allison 2014; Geva-May et al. 2018). In contrast to other f...

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)0.549
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.795
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.5490.795
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0150.026
Science and technology studies0.0050.018
Scholarly communication0.0130.011
Open science0.0090.011
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.877
GPT teacher head0.721
Teacher spread0.157 · 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
Domainnot available
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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Comparative Policy Analysis Research and PracticeSame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207