MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376455031 · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4441613

Social Implications of Technological Disruptions: A Transdisciplinary Cybernetics Science and Occupational Science Perspective

2023· article· en· W4376455031 on OpenAlexaff
Pedro H. Albuquerque, Sophie Albuquerque

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicErgonomics and Human Factors
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Occupational scienceCyberneticsEngineering ethicsSociologyOutline of social scienceSocial scienceScience, technology, society and environment educationEpistemologyEngineeringOccupational therapyPsychologyScience educationPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: aff_core · design weight: 5595.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: low

Perspective on social implications of technological disruption; abstract absent, and the title points to technology and society rather than to research practice.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: low

The title alone does not provide enough detail to establish a research object, but it does not clearly concern research practice.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: low

Title suggests social implications of tech disruption broadly; no abstract and not clearly about research.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.020
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicErgonomics and Human FactorsFrench-language works237,207