MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038727272 · doi:10.1016/j.alter.2020.06.003

Introduction of a new rubric: “Crises and Disability: Issues, debates, experiences”

2020· editorial· en· W3038727272 on OpenAlexaff
Michel Desjardin, Jean‐Sébastien Eideliman, Emmanuelle Fillion, Jean‐Francois Trani, Myriam Winance

Bibliographic record

VenueAlter · 2020
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRubricSociologyPsychologyPedagogyPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsMathematics educationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crises and disability: Issues, debates, experiencesFor the past few months, warnings and crises have been linked together in a crescendo. Public policies hardly produce any “answers,” but on the contrary create even more concern. In France since the end of 2018, a diversity of intersecting and sometimes allied social forces have risen, notably the yellow vests; the staffs of hospital and of sheltered social housing structures for elderly dependent people (Ehpad) who have been on strike for m...

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.009
Scholarly communication0.0160.012
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0220.032
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.012

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.332 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlterSame topicSocial Policy and Reform StudiesFrench-language works237,207