MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225491748 · doi:10.17104/1863-8937-2022-1-3

Zum Thema

2022· article· de· W4225491748 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Schönpflug

Bibliographic record

VenueZeitschrift für Ideengeschichte · 2022
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicConsumer behavior in food and health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Im September 2021 ging die Meldung über die Nachrichtenticker, dass auf Anordnung einer Schulbehörde in Ontario/Canada knapp fünftausend Bücher dem Feuer zugeführt worden waren – darunter berühmte Werke wie Tintin in Amerika, Asterix in Amerika sowie drei Bände von Lucky Luke. Ziel der Aktion sei die Aussöhnung mit den amerikanischen Ureinwohnern gewesen, die in herabwürdigender Weise dargestellt worden seien. Ist es wieder so weit? Müssen wir uns Sorgen um die Freiheit des gedruckten Wortes machen? Und zwar keineswegs nur in der wachsenden Zahl von Ländern der Welt, in denen autoritäre Regime Wissen und Meinungen zu kontrollieren suchen, sondern auch inmitten der westlichen Zivilisation?

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZeitschrift für IdeengeschichteSame topicConsumer behavior in food and healthFrench-language works237,207