MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388124026 · doi:10.15353/cjo.v68i5.4621

CNIB: Focus on the Future

2021· article· en· W4388124026 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Cao Aco

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometry · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Accessibility for Disabilities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndependence (probability theory)Focus (optics)Identity (music)Internet privacyPublic relationsAdvertisingSociologyBusinessPsychologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceAestheticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, CNIB is the first place people turn to when they discover they are facing significant vision loss. CNIB helps people regain their independence by providing access to specialized rehabilitation services, innova­tive consumer products, and one of the world's largest libraries for people with print disabilities. Recently, the 88-year-old organization has made some changes, including a new brand and visual identity, as well as an exciting new approach to 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

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)0.007
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 score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1120.026

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 head0.325
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of optometry/CJO. Canadian journal of optometrySame topicDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesFrench-language works237,207