MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981567298 · doi:10.1007/978-1-4842-5197-3_10

Time Range Calculations

2019· book-chapter· en· W2981567298 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathi Kellenberger, Clayton Groom, Ed Pollack

Bibliographic record

VenueApress eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicForecasting Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWindow (computing)Quarter (Canadian coin)Range (aeronautics)Computer scienceDatabaseSql serverPeriod (music)SQLWorld Wide WebGeographyEngineeringPhysicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A very common reporting requirement is to produce totals by different ranges of time for comparison. Typical reports will contain totals by month, quarter, and year, sometimes with comparisons to the same period in the prior year or for month-to-date or year-to-date totals. Products like SQL Server Analysis Services and Power BI provide functions to navigate date hierarchies. With window functions in SQL Server 2012 or later, you can produce the same calculations using the techniques provided earlier in this book.

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)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1770.109

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 head0.154
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApress eBooksSame topicForecasting Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207