The economics of scientific misconduct
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Journal Article The Economics of Scientific Misconduct Get access Nicola Lacetera, Nicola Lacetera * University of Toronto *Rotman School of Management and Department of Management (UT Mississauga), University of Toronto. Email: nicola.lacetera@utoronto.ca. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Lorenzo Zirulia Lorenzo Zirulia University of Bologna; KITeS, Bocconi University; and Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Volume 27, Issue 3, October 2011, Pages 568–603, https://doi.org/10.1093/jleo/ewp031 Published: 20 October 2009
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.021 | 0.143 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".