MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093551974 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2020.26326

A Cockeyed Optimist

2020· editorial· en· W3093551974 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Lynn Nagle

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2020
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Education, Practice, and Leadership
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptimismCourageCharacter (mathematics)PsychologyPolitical scienceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ManagementPsychoanalysisSociologySocial psychologyMedicineLawInternal medicineEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the 1958 musical South Pacific, the character Nelly Forbush trills a song of optimism and hope amid the darkness of World War II (South Pacific Enterprises and Logan 1958). The chipper message of this fictional navy nurse might well be welcome amid the negative timbre of the pervasive political, cultural and societal upheaval that we are experiencing today - not to mention the burden of a global pandemic. The tune delivers the message of a so-called "cockeyed optimist," staying positive while many are not and being buoyed by the anticipation of brighter, sunny days ahead (South Pacific Enterprises and Logan 1958). COVID-19 has unloaded countless blows to virtually every aspect of the life we once knew; surely, this is enough to leave any cockeyed optimist reeling. Where do we find the strength of character to prevail during times like this? Somehow, good leaders do; finding creativity, courage and conviction to make the most of a bad situation, they rise above it. They show optimism in the face of fear, the unknown and circumstances beyond their control. Instilling abiding trust in their followers, they lead out of the abyss, shining light on new possibilities and opportunities.

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)0.029
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0110.023
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.008

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing leadershipSame topicNursing Education, Practice, and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207