MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982502942 · doi:10.3138/jsp.51.1.01

When We Began: The Origins of <i>JSP</i>

2019· article· en· W2982502942 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Ian Montagnes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Scholarly Publishing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital Humanities and Scholarship
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingPragmatismSubject (documents)Advice (programming)MarshManagementSociologyArt historyLibrary scienceHistoryPhilosophyArtEpistemologyComputer scienceLiteratureEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

JSP was founded fifty years ago from the vision of Marsh Jeanneret and the pragmatism of Eleanor Harman, director and assistant director, respectively, of the University of Toronto Press. It was conceived in a golden age of scholarly publishing as a journal primarily of practical advice, for authors as well as publishers, presented in an elegant design. Rigorous research into its subject had not yet begun.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0080.019
Scholarly communication0.0320.038
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0060.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.027

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Scholarly PublishingSame topicDigital Humanities and ScholarshipFrench-language works237,207