MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973050428 · doi:10.1057/palcomms.2016.71

Erratum: Reflections on science advisory systems in Canada

2016· erratum· en· W2973050428 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Communications · 2016
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdvisory committeePolitical scienceLibrary scienceManagementLawPublic administrationComputer scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Correction to: Palgrave Communications (2016) 2, Article number: 16048. doi:10.1057/palcomms.2016.48; Published 2 August 2016; Updated 13 September 2016 The affiliations of the authors Arthur Carty and Paul Dufour were listed incorrectly; these have now been corrected and read as follows: Arthur Carty—University of Waterloo, Canada

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0780.202
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.000
Open science0.0210.004
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.593
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.032 · 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