MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3145050725 · doi:10.29173/iasl7861

Literature Quizzes: Celebrating the Ongoing Importance of Wide Reading

2021· article· en· W3145050725 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gerri Judkins

Bibliographic record

VenueIASL Annual Conference Proceedings · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)HumanityEmpathyMythologyEntertainmentRealismResource (disambiguation)PsychologySociologyPedagogyLiteratureComputer scienceVisual artsArtSocial psychologyLinguisticsPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Literature Quizzes are an integral part of the Southwell School Library programme. Students read widely, hoping to represent us in the annual Kids’ Lit QuizTM (www.kidslitquiz.com ). In this time of electronic entertainment entice your students to enjoy literature, books and ebooks. Reading encourages empathy with others whose lives and situations differ, global awareness, and knowledge of history. Myths and legends influence cultural practice and social realism helps them cope with life’s problems. Reading is a resource for our humanity. At this workshop play brain-training games. These will be given away along with signed books from New Zealand authors. Learn how to write quiz questions and select teams. Hear how we use cognitive technology to help students retain and retrieve literary information. Make Lit Quizzes part of your library programmes and see your readers grow exponentially. There may be a regional of the Kids’ Lit QuizTM near you!

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.008

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIASL Annual Conference ProceedingsSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207