MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4237345702 · doi:10.1177/0959354319829250

Peer review

2019· article· en· W4237345702 on OpenAlexaff
Kieran C. O’Doherty

Bibliographic record

VenueTheory & Psychology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConscientiousnessPeer reviewPsychologyEditorial boardFunction (biology)SociologySocial psychologyLibrary sciencePolitical sciencePersonalityComputer scienceBig Five personality traitsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peer-reviewed journals rely on the support of the scholarly community. Journals such as Theory & Psychology could not function without the dedication and conscientiousness of so many scholars who freely share their time and expertise to act as reviewers for manuscripts that have been submitted for publication. Theory & Psychology is grateful for the support it receives from peer reviewers and members of the editorial board.

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)0.075
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0750.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0160.076
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.049

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 head0.693
GPT teacher head0.683
Teacher spread0.010 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueTheory & PsychologySame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchFrench-language works237,207