MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246256642 · doi:10.3886/icpsr03747.v3

CBS News Monthly Poll #3, February 2003

2003· dataset· en· W4246256642 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueICPSR Data Holdings · 2003
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLeadership, Human Resources, Global Affairs
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked to give their opinions of President George W. Bush and his handling of the presidency, foreign policy, the economy, and the situation with Iraq, as well as their views of the United Nations and its handling of the situation with Iraq. Those queried were asked which of the following issues should receive the most Congressional attention in the coming year: fighting the war on terror, improving the economy, or dealing with Iraq. A series of questions addressed United States foreign relations, including whether world leaders respected Bush and whether their perceptions affected the United States' ability to accomplish foreign policy objectives. Respondents were asked whether they considered Canada, France, and Russia to be allies or enemies of the United States, and how they viewed the United States' relations with European allies and with the rest of the world. Respondents' familiarity with and understanding of possible United States military action against Iraq was assessed. Questions focused on whether the Bush administration was open to non-militaristic options, whether Congress had asked enough questions of the administration, whether military action should be taken without the support of the allies and/or of United Nations approval, whether United Nations weapons inspectors should be given more time, and whether the removal of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was an appropriate use of military action. In the event of war, respondents were asked whether the threat of terrorism against the United States would increase, whether the United States should help pay the cost of rebuilding Iraq after the war, and whether the United States should maintain peacekeeping troops in Iraq. Those polled were asked to assess the threat of terrorism, including whether the Bush administration's foreign policy made the United States a more likely target, the likelihood of a terrorist attack against the United States in the next few months, and whether the respondent was personally concerned about being a victim of terrorism. Questions sought respondent views on whether Americans who opposed a war with Iraq should be permitted to hold protest marches and whether the views of American and worldwide protestors should be taken into account by the Bush administration when making foreign policy decisions. An additional question asked respondents if they were bothered whenever Bush spoke publicly about his religious beliefs. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, voter registration and participation history, political party, political orientation, marital status, religion, education, Hispanic descent, race, children in household, and household income.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0080.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.247 · 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