MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100401940 · doi:10.1017/s0007087420000497

Innovation in a crisis: rethinking conferences and scholarship in a pandemic and climate emergency

2020· article· en· W3100401940 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel A. Robinson, Megan Baumhammer, Lea Beiermann, Daniel Belteki, Amy C. Chambers, KELCEY GIBBONS, Edward Guimont, Kathryn Heffner, EMMA-LOUISE HILL, JEMMA HOUGHTON, Daniella McCahey, Sarah A. Qidwai, Charlotte Sleigh, Nicola Sugden, James Sumner

Bibliographic record

VenueThe British Journal for the History of Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConferences and Exhibitions Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekJohns Hopkins UniversityUniversity of ChicagoPrinceton University
KeywordsMantraPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ScholarshipPublic relationsPolitical scienceSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSociologyMedia studiesLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is a cliché of self-help advice that there are no problems, only opportunities. The rationale and actions of the BSHS in creating its Global Digital History of Science Festival may be a rare genuine confirmation of this mantra. The global COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 meant that the society's usual annual conference - like everyone else's - had to be cancelled. Once the society decided to go digital, we had a hundred days to organize and deliver our first online festival. In the hope that this will help, inspire and warn colleagues around the world who are also trying to move online, we here detail the considerations, conversations and thinking behind the organizing team's decisions.

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)0.083
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.109
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0830.109
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.005
Science and technology studies0.0330.087
Scholarly communication0.0430.042
Open science0.0050.037
Research integrity0.0160.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.330
Teacher spread0.209 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe British Journal for the History of ScienceSame topicConferences and Exhibitions ManagementFrench-language works237,207