MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964739652 · doi:10.1038/s42003-019-0516-1

Science–graphic art partnerships to increase research impact

2019· article· en· W2964739652 on OpenAlexaff
Colin K. Khoury, Yael Kisel, Michael B. Kantar, Ellie Barber, Vincent Ricciardi, Carni Klirs, Leah Kucera, Zia Mehrabi, Nathanael Johnson, Simone Klabin, Álvaro Valiño, Kelsey Nowakowski, Ígnasi Bartomeus, Navin Ramankutty, Allison J. Miller, Meagan E. Schipanski, Michael A. Gore, Ari Novy

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraphicsTest (biology)Computer scienceMultimediaHuman–computer interactionComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graphics are becoming increasingly important for scientists to effectively communicate their findings to broad audiences, but most researchers lack expertise in visual media. We suggest collaboration between scientists and graphic designers as a way forward and discuss the results of a pilot project to test this type of collaboration.

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)0.068
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.120
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0680.120
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0100.006
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0230.019
Open science0.0050.042
Research integrity0.0090.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1830.028

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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designObservational
DomainEvaluation
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

Citations37
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications BiologySame topicInnovative Human-Technology InteractionFrench-language works237,207