MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205877735 · doi:10.3138/jsp.37.2.131

Where Manuscript Development Meets Faculty Development

2006· article· en· W4205877735 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Amy Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Scholarly Publishing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPublishing and Scholarly Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingScholarshipCraftLibrary scienceWork (physics)Process (computing)SociologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceMedia studiesComputer scienceEngineeringVisual artsArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The much-discussed crisis in scholarly publishing inspired the creation of an experimental program a few years ago at Emory University. The Manuscript Development Program seeks to support faculty members publishing books in this changing environment. Scholars who choose to work with the program often wish to make their scholarship more accessible to somewhat broader or interdisciplinary audiences. We also help junior faculty learn more about the publishing process and revise book proposals, as well as offering occasional workshops on issues in scholarly publishing and the craft of writing.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScholarly communication
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.1000.130
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.177 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Scholarly PublishingSame topicPublishing and Scholarly CommunicationFrench-language works237,207