MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386910394 · doi:10.2196/51852

Authors’ Reply: Concerns on Generalizability

2023· article· en· W4386910394 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hsueh-Wen Chung, Chen‐Jei Tai, Polun Chang, Wen‐Lin Su, Li‐Yin Chien

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneralizability theoryPsychologyComputer scienceMedicineDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

mHealth app

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)0.059
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.481
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0590.481
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0370.045
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.013

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 head0.571
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.043 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealth→Same topicHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→