Reviewer Acknowledgements for International Journal of Chemistry, Vol. 9, No. 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International Journal of Chemistry wishes to acknowledge the following individuals for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Their help and contributions in maintaining the quality of the journal is greatly appreciated. Many authors, regardless of whether International Journal of Chemistry publishes their work, appreciate the helpful feedback provided by the reviewers.Reviewers for Volume 9, Number 2 Abdul Rouf Dar, University of Florida, USAAhmet Ozan Gezerman, Institute of Science, TurkeyAsghari Gul, Comsats IIT, PakistanAyodele Temidayo Odularu, University of Fort Hare, South AfricaBhargava Karumudi, University of Illinois at Chicago, USABinod P Pandey, The Pennsylvania State University, USADesheng Zheng, University of Houston, USAFatima Tuz Johra, Kookmin University, BangladeshGreg Peters, University of Findlay, USAJiajue Chai, Brown University, USAMaolin Lu, Yale University, USAMeriem Belhachemi, University of Bechar, AlgeriaMohamed Abass, Ain Shams University, EgyptMonira Nessem Michael, National institute of standards (NIS), EgyptMustafa Oguzhan Kaya, Siirt University, TurkeyNejib Hussein Mekni, Al Manar University, TunisiaPraveen Kumar, Texas Tech University, USAR. K. Dey, Birla Institute of Technology (BIT), IndiaSayandev Chatterjee, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, USASitaram Acharya, Texas Christian University, USASujan Kumar Sarkar, Ruhr University Bochum, GermanyWaseem Hassan, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Brazil Albert JohnOn behalf of,The Editorial Board of International Journal of ChemistryCanadian Center of Science and Education
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 | 0.037 | 0.343 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.073 | 0.042 |
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".