MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327938231 · doi:10.1038/s42004-023-00855-z

A critical look at the practice and culture of science with calls to action

2023· article· en· W4327938231 on OpenAlexaff
Hind A. Al‐Abadleh

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Chemistry · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAcademic Writing and Publishing
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAction (physics)Call to actionSociologyEngineering ethicsSocial scienceEnvironmental ethicsEpistemologyPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efforts are ongoing to address inequities in scientific fields. Here, the author provides a critical look at the practice and culture of science with calls to action to broaden participation and recognition of talented members from marginalized groups in the chemical sciences. Efforts are ongoing to address inequities in scientific fields. Here, the author provides a critical look at the practice and culture of science with calls to action to broaden participation and recognition of talented members from marginalized groups in the chemical sciences.

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)0.067
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0670.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0360.067
Scholarly communication0.0310.031
Open science0.0040.018
Research integrity0.0250.047
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designNot applicable
DomainEvaluation
GenreCommentary

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications ChemistrySame topicAcademic Writing and PublishingFrench-language works237,207