Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The term “meta‐analysis” can be used to indicate a literature review of a body of empirical findings as disclosed in a large number of focused research reports; a summary of replication research on a specific topic, often undertaken with precisely the same techniques; or a theoretical or methodological analysis of philosophical problems associated with approaches like “methodological individualism” or the ideal‐type method. Sometimes the term is used without a great deal of analytical precision. A meta‐metaparadigm called pragmatic sociology has been proposed but not widely accepted. Sometimes the attention paid to meta‐issues is regarded as too abstract, even by theorists, and too removed from empirical research. However, without good metatheory it is very hard to translate one paradigm or result into a different framework.
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 | 0.100 | 0.340 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.026 | 0.053 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.024 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.064 | 0.008 |
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".