MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250899369 · doi:10.4101/jvwr.v10i1.7277

Editorial

2017· editorial· en· W4250899369 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Virtual Worlds Research · 2017
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)MetaverseField (mathematics)Computer scienceSociologyData scienceEngineering ethicsWorld Wide WebLibrary scienceVirtual realityEngineeringHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 2017 Assembled issue of the Journal of Virtual Worlds Research is a collection of four highly interdisciplinary research papers, representing the diversity that is 'virtual worlds'. When considering this editorial piece, I decided to begin with the name of the issue: Assembled. Every year the journal has an Assembled issue, representing a collection of peer-reviewed articles which my predecessors have rightly described as 'eclectic' and 'diverse'. Although the articles presented herein are equally diverse with regard to scope and methodology, they are all representative of virtual worlds research, a field that truly is 'assembled' - emerging from and supported by numerous passionate scholars from various intellectual backgrounds.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0010.005
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.397 · 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