MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252037961 · doi:10.1007/978-94-6091-731-8

Phronesis as Professional Knowledge

2012· book· en· W4252037961 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueSensePublishers eBooks · 2012
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Education and Practice Innovations
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCharles Sturt University
KeywordsPhronesisPsychologyEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professional Practice and Education aims to provide a forum for perspectives of our understanding of the nature of professional practice and the consequences flowing for education in the professions.It is the intention of the Editor that a platform will be provided for contributors from diverse cultural backgrounds, so that, on a global level, the nature of professions and their cultural/historical positioning might be problematised and re-examined.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.016
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.388
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations225
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensePublishers eBooksSame topicLegal Education and Practice InnovationsFrench-language works237,207