MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127762528 · doi:10.1353/mos.2020.0021

The New Wild West: Risk, Viral Politics, and the Emergence of Epigenetics

2020· article· en· W3127762528 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jami Weinstein

Bibliographic record

VenueMosaic · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGun Ownership and Violence Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHygieneBusinessFeelingPotable waterEnvironmental healthMedicinePublic relationsComputer securityPolitical scienceEngineeringPsychologySocial psychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The risk of bodily penetration by bullets emerges as the gravest threat under this logic Since carrying firearms is the norm in our fantasies of the Wild West, saloon owners present a feeling of safety for the patrons by restricting them-if a fight breaks out, the risk of losing one's life is less probable In response to this, the United States Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the World Health Organization release hygiene protocols regarding hand washing, the use of hand sanitizers, and antimicrobial soaps (2002, 2009) (Guideline and WHO) The concern over what epidemiologists call fomites becomes the focus;fomites are anything that can be a conduit for transmission of infectious disease between living beings (think: paper money, doorknobs, toilet seats, subway straps, stethoscopes, intravenous drip tubes, etc ) [ ]with respect to the WHO guidelines, Insufficient or very low compliance rates have been reported from both developed and developing countries (WHO) [ ]not only must governments and expert organizations provide the protocols and guidelines, but compliance must also be monitored and controlled

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 venueMosaicSame topicGun Ownership and Violence ResearchFrench-language works237,207