MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306165726 · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1045924

Editorial: Police education and training revisited: Drawbacks and advances

2022· editorial· en· W4306165726 on OpenAlexaff
Mario S. Staller, Swen Koerner, Craig Bennell, Joel Suss

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Psychology · 2022
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyTraining (meteorology)Front (military)Cognitive scienceApplied psychologyMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0210.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.015

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.400 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PsychologySame topicPolicing Practices and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207