MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247369394 · doi:10.18356/1768c00d-en

Acknowledgements

2016· book-chapter· en· W4247369394 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueStatistical papers. Series M · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic statisticsCommissionOfficial statisticsEuropean commissionWork (physics)Business cycleStatistical analysisSummary statisticsOrder (exchange)StatisticsPolitical scienceEconomicsGeographyFinanceEconomic policyEngineeringMacroeconomicsEuropean unionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The preparation of the Handbook on Economic Tendency Surveys was initiated by the United Nations Statistical Commission as part of the international programme of work on short-term economic statistics which was developed in response to the 2007/2008 economic and financial crisis. The international programme on short-term economic statistics was the result of a wide consultation initiated by the United Nations Statistics Division and Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) in collaboration with Statistics Canada, Statistics Netherlands and the Russian Federal State Statistics Service in order to ensure a coordinated statistical response to the economic and financial crisis. Four themes were identified in the programme: business cycle composite indicators, economic tendency surveys, rapid estimates, and data template and analytical indicators.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4030.262

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.271 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStatistical papers. Series MSame topicInsurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207