List of Canadian independent, scholarly journals (2020)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This data set contains a list of active, Canadian independent, scholarly journals compiled as a part of the "Documenting labour in Canadian academic publishing" research study. The data was collected between October 2019-April 2020, and reviewed and updated in July-August 2020. For the purposes of this project, the following inclusion criteria were used: Canadian: a minimum of one-third of the core editorial board is affiliated with an eligible Canadian post-secondary institution. We used this as the primary criteria and not whether or not the journal title is owned by a Canadian not-for-profit organization. As we are interested primarily in labour, limiting it based on the editorial board was natural for this study. Independent: A journal is not affiliated with a commercial publisher (e.g. Springer, Elsevier, Sage, etc.). Non-profits, like Érudit and University of Toronto Press, were included in the project. Scholarly: defined as a peer-reviewed academic publication that disseminates the results of original scholarship. We have excluded additional student-run journals as per the SSHRC guidelines as well. Active: The journal has published in the last 3 years. The second list is of the journals that we removed from our original data collection that did not meet the above criteria when reviewed. For more information on the project, you can see the presentation slides from the 2020 Library Publishing Forum when the initial results were discussed: https://escholarship.mcgill.ca/concern/presentations/7w62fd646?locale=en and Lange, J. & Severson, S., (2021) “What Are the Characteristics of Canadian Independent, Scholarly Journals? Results from a Website Analysis”, The Journal of Electronic Publishing 24(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.3998/jep.153.
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 | 0.002 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.033 | 0.073 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.112 | 0.078 |
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".