MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247612621 · doi:10.1515/9781503604100-001

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

2020· book-chapter· en· W4247612621 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Andrew Elfenbein

Bibliographic record

VenueStanford University Press eBooks · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistics Education and Methodologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of California, Santa BarbaraUniversity of TorontoUniversity of WollongongAmerican Council of Learned SocietiesUniversity of MinnesotaAmerican Philosophical Society
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

What interdisciplinarity feels like: traversing the length of campus in subzero weather to meet with your collaborators; writing embarrassed notes to your statistics teacher explaining that you did not notice the last problem on the homework; resigning yourself to the fact that everyone else in the room will interpret a complex interaction graph more easily than you will; spending a shocking amount on updating SPSS; patiently explaining (again) why psychology can be useful.Luckily for me, I have worked with a remarkable group of psychologists, who made the benefits of interdisciplinarity outweigh its challenges.My first thanks go to Paul van den Broek, who invited me to audit his class when I inquired about reading comprehension in psychology; that was the beginning of a long journey and an important friendship.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.277
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.068 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStanford University Press eBooksSame topicStatistics Education and MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207