MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386692566 · doi:10.5195/aa.2023.472

Realizing Possibilities: A Conversation with Akaninyene A. Otu

2023· article· en· W4386692566 on OpenAlexaff
Tiina Maripuu

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropology & Aging · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationPsychologyCommunicationCognitive science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although not an anthropologist himself, Dr. Akan Otu explained to me why he values the contributions that anthropology and qualitative methods can offer: "I think anthropology has a vital role to play in scientific endeavor, as it has the goal of understanding human experiences and practices, illuminating their interconnectedness and interdependence.The anthropological approach to medical research is being increasingly adopted.This is because it provides a deeper understanding of observed phenomena and captures other unanticipated facets of the topic that may help in the interpretation of quantitative data."

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.012
Scholarly communication0.0090.016
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0100.041
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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.324 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueAnthropology & AgingSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207