MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2965807014 · doi:10.29173/cais922

Publishing Productivity of Faculty at Research Universities

2016· article· fr· W2965807014 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Budd

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityPublishingHumanitiesAggregate (composite)Library scienceSociologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceArtEconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the past several years faculty at researchuniversities have been publishing more and morejournal articles. The proposed poster presents sets ofdata that show precisely how much more faculty arepublishing. The institutional figures unequivocallydemonstrate a trend that is rather stark. Moreover,the data show that citations to the work of theuniversities’ faculty demonstrate a similar trend ofincrease. Not only will the aggregate data bepresented, tables will show the comparative rankingsof the institutions over four time periods.Depuis plusieurs années les professeurs dans lesuniversités de recherche publient de plus en plusd’articles dans des revues savantes. L’afficheproposée présente des ensembles de données quimontrent avec précision la quantité supplémentaired’articles publiés par les professeurs. Les chiffresinstitutionnels démontrent sans équivoque unetendance qui est frappante. En outre, les donnéesmontrent que les citations des travaux deschercheurs montrent une tendance similaire àl’augmentation. Les données agrégées serontprésentées, ainsi que les tableaux montrant lesclassements comparatifs des institutions sur quatrepériodes de temps.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0220.044
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.007

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 head0.436
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.041 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI→Same topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research→French-language works237,207→