MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Quantitative Modeling of Stress and Coping

2018· reference-entry· en· W2920150311 on OpenAlexaff
Richard W. J. Neufeld, Bryan Grant

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMental Health Research Topics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceConnectionismManagement scienceField (mathematics)Data scienceCognitive scienceArtificial intelligencePsychologyEngineeringMathematicsArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forms of modeling in the field are described in nontechnical terms. Included are analytical (mathematical), computational (computer simulation, mainly of connectionist networks), and statistical (generic, transcontent data theory, and methods) modeling. Distinctions among modeling forms are stipulated, and each is exposited through the method of illustration, with exemplary prototypes. Potential avenues of integration among complementing types of analytical modeling are identified. Emphasized throughout is the demonstrable need to invoke formal modeling to rigorously address the long-held dynamical nature of the topic domain. It is noted that analytical modeling can disclose otherwise intractable information, including that with implications for stress-related intervention; it can also prescribe its own empirical tests and measures, resembling theory-assessment technology found in longer established scientific disciplines.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicMental Health Research Topics→French-language works237,207→