MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229001556 · doi:10.22329/il.v40i4.6571

Books Received

2020· article· en· W4229001556 on OpenAlexaff
Informal Logic

Bibliographic record

VenueÉrudit (Université de Montréal) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methodologies in Social Sciences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivilityPolitenessArgument (complex analysis)NoticePoliticsFace (sociological concept)DemocracyPolitical scienceLaw and economicsAdversarySociologyLawSocial scienceComputer securityComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors show that disagreeing civilly, even with your sworn enemies, is a crucial part of democracy.Rejecting the popular view that civility requires a polite and concessive attitude, they argue that our biggest challenge is not remaining calm in the face of an opponent, but rather ensuring that our political arguments actually address those on the opposing side.Too often politicians and pundits merely simulate political debate, offering carefully structured caricatures of their opponents.These simulations mimic political argument in a way designed to convince citizens that those with whom they disagree are not worth talking to.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉrudit (Université de Montréal)Same topicInnovative Teaching Methodologies in Social SciencesFrench-language works237,207