MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990856872 · doi:10.1177/1071181319631191

The Life and Legacy of Professor John Senders

2019· article· en· W2990856872 on OpenAlexaff
Peter A. Hancock, Gabriella M. Hancock, Abigail Sellen, John D. Lee, Benjamin D. Sawyer, Thomas B. Sheridan, Paul Milgram, Penelope Sanderson

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicHistory and advancements in chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSession (web analytics)Character (mathematics)Personal lifeSimple (philosophy)PsychoanalysisHistoryPsychologyEpistemologyComputer sciencePhilosophyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This session looks to serve the purpose of recalling and recounting the life and contributions of Professor John Senders. The contributors to this session include his direct colleagues, his students, his co-authors, those whom he inspired, and even members of his family. These designations are not exclusive! Senders made so many contributions across virtually a century of his lifetime that we are constrained to provide only selective highlights in this memorial session, such as John being named the winner of an “Ig-Nobel” Award. We shall each survey particular works which influenced us, but interweave those observations with personal experiences that can serve to reveal John the character, who was so much more than the simple written record that he has left behind.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicHistory and advancements in chemistryFrench-language works237,207