MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235313233 · doi:10.1145/3331041.3331042

Editor's introduction

2019· article· en· W4235313233 on OpenAlexaff
Hu Fu

Bibliographic record

VenueACM SIGecom Exchanges · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEconomic and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRealmComputer scienceEngineering ethicsSociologyManagement scienceData scienceLibrary scienceOperations researchPolitical scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This issue of SIGEcom Exchanges has two articles coming from the First Workshop on Mechanism Design for Social Good, which took place at EC in 2017. A survey by Scott Kominers is based on the keynote he gave there, which overviews recent examples of market design in the realm of social good improvement. The workshop's organizers, Rediet Abebe and Kira Goldner, contributed a report that summarizes each keynote and contributed talk at the workshop.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.226
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2260.120

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM SIGecom ExchangesSame topicEconomic and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207