MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383227206 · doi:10.1163/15685306-bja10136

Publications Trends in Society & Animals from 2009–2019: A Bibliometric Analysis

2023· article· en· W4383227206 on OpenAlexaff
Camille X. Rousseau, John-Tyler Binfet

Bibliographic record

VenueSociety and Animals · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublishingContext (archaeology)PortraitLibrary scienceBibliometricsAnimal welfareSociologySocial sciencePolitical scienceMedia studiesHistoryLawArt historyBiologyEcologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This bibliometric analysis of Society & Animals (SOAN) publications from 2009–2019 generated a portrait of publishing trends including prevalent authors (i.e., Who?), institutions publishing HAI research (i.e., Where?), and salient themes of research showcased (i.e., What?). Pete Porter and Randy Malamud emerged as preeminent authors and collaborators. Researchers with prevalent citations included Pavol Prokop, Christoph Randler, and Randy Malamud. Özel et al. (2009) had the most cited publication of SOAN articles whereas Haraway (2008) was the most cited reference across SOAN publications. The University of Melbourne, Georgia State University, and the Slovakian Academy of Science emerged as key organizations, and the top three countries central to SOAN publications were the USA, Australia, and England. Salient keywords included animal welfare, companion animals, and animals. Text analysis of titles and abstracts revealed that dog, article, and companion animal were prevalent. The findings are discussed within the broader context of HAI research.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.1190.173
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociety and AnimalsSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207