MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4205698926 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-05039-8

Author Correction: Hotspots for rockfishes, structural corals, and large-bodied sponges along the central coast of Pacific Canada

2022· erratum· en· W4205698926 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alejandro Frid, Madeleine McGreer, Kyle L. Wilson, Cherisse Du Preez, Tristan Blaine, Tammy Norgard

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOceanographyGeographyFisheryData scienceBiologyGeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Author notes These authors contributed equally: Alejandro Frid, Madeleine McGreer and Kyle L. Wilson. Authors and Affiliations Central Coast Indigenous Resource Alliance, Campbell River, BC, Canada Alejandro Frid, Madeleine McGreer, Kyle L. Wilson & Tristan Blaine School of Environmental Studies, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada Alejandro Frid Institute of Ocean Sciences, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Sidney, BC, Canada Cherisse Du Preez Pacific Biological Station, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Nanaimo, BC, Canada Tammy Norgard Authors Alejandro Frid View author publications You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar Madeleine McGreer View author publications You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar Kyle L. Wilson View author publications You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar Cherisse Du Preez View author publications You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar Tristan Blaine View author publications You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar Tammy Norgard View author publications You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar Corresponding author Correspondence to Alejandro Frid .

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.032

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicMarine and coastal plant biology→French-language works237,207→