MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280522756 · doi:10.3389/frsc.2022.832506

We Have Sent Ourselves to Iceland (With Apologies to Iceland): Changing the Academy From Internally-Driven to Externally Partnered

2022· article· en· W4280522756 on OpenAlexafffund
Gerald G. Singh

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Sustainable Cities · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersOcean Nexus Center, EarthLab, University of WashingtonNippon FoundationEarthLab, University of WashingtonCanada First Research Excellence FundOcean Frontier InstituteUniversity of Washington
KeywordsExcellencePrestigeSustainabilityPublic relationsSociologyRelevance (law)Higher educationQuality (philosophy)Political sciencePower (physics)AccountabilityLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brave New World, Aldus Huxley presented a dystopic vision of the world where global despotic power was maintained, in part, through isolating academics in Iceland. Current academic accountability is based on notions of excellence that reflect prestige. In governing itself based on excellence, I argue academia has metaphorically sent itself to Iceland, which has consequences for the relevance of academia toward sustainable development. Internally-driven academies are facing their own sustainability issues, as more students are trained for too-few professor positions, and must find work in other fields with inadequate training. Academic measures of excellence attempt to reflect merit but perpetuate pre-conceived notions of prestige, which is discriminatory, contributes to intellectual gate-keeping, and distracts from research rigor and policy relevance. Measures of excellence fail to translate to real-world impact in three important ways: academic reviews that accounts for prestige lead to poor and biased predictions of outcomes of research projects; prestigious individuals are not more reliable experts than less prestigious individuals (and may be more overconfident); prestigious institutions are not more likely to contribute to sustainable development outcomes than less prestigious institutions. It is time to drop academic notions of excellence and turn toward external partnerships, where academic institutions can focus more on real-world impact, train students for diverse careers, and allow academic research to focus on quality over quantity. For academia to be relevant to society, and to serve people graduating academic institutions, academia must proactively leave Iceland and rejoin the rest of the world.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.010

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 head0.215
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.244 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Sustainable CitiesSame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchFrench-language works237,207