MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036509517 · doi:10.1021/acsami.0c10979

Confronting Racism in Chemistry Journals

2020· editorial· en· W3036509517 on OpenAlexaff
Cynthia J. Burrows, Jiaxing Huang, Shu Wang, Hyun Jae Kim, Gerald J. Meyer, Kirk S. Schanze, T. Randall Lee, Jodie L. Lutkenhaus, David L. Kaplan, Christopher W. Jones, Carolyn R. Bertozzi, Laura L. Kiessling, Mary Beth Mulcahy, Craig W. Lindsley, M. G. Finn, Joel D. Blum, Prashant V. Kamat, Wonyong Choi, Shane A. Snyder, Courtney C. Aldrich, Stuart J. Rowan, Bin Liu, Dennis C. Liotta, Paul S. Weiss, Deqing Zhang, Krishna N. Ganesh, Harry A. Atwater, J. Justin Gooding, David T. Allen, Christopher A. Voigt, Jonathan V. Sweedler, Alanna Schepartz, Vincent M. Rotello, Sébastien Lecommandoux, Shana J. Sturla, Sharon Hammes‐Schiffer, Jillian M. Buriak, Jonathan W. Steed, Hongwei Wu, Julie B. Zimmerman, Bryan W. Brooks, Phillip E. Savage, William B. Tolman, Thomas Hofmann, Joan F. Brennecke, Thomas A. Holme, Kenneth M. Merz, Gustavo E. Scuseria, William L. Jorgensen, Gunda I. Georg, Shaomeng Wang, Philip Proteau, John R. Yates, Peter J. Stang, Gilbert C. Walker, Marc A. Hillmyer, Lynne S. Taylor, Teri W. Odom, Erick M. Carreira, Kai Rossen, Paul J. Chirik, Scott J. Miller, Joan‐Emma Shea, Anne B. McCoy, Martin T. Zanni, Gregory V. Hartland, Gregory D. Scholes, Joseph A. Loo, James Milne, Sarah B. Tegen, Daniel T. Kulp, Julia Laskin

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Applied Materials & Interfaces · 2020
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAcademic Writing and Publishing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRacismMaterials scienceNanotechnologyEngineering physicsPhysicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

International audience

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.064
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.064
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0130.011
Scholarly communication0.0210.010
Open science0.0030.011
Research integrity0.0140.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.015

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
DomainEvaluation
GenreEditorial

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Applied Materials & InterfacesSame topicAcademic Writing and PublishingFrench-language works237,207