MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388642969 · doi:10.52843/cassyni.9s6h60

How to Use Bibliometric Study for Writing a Paper: A Starter Guide

2021· preprint· en· W4388642969 on OpenAlex
Nader Ale Ebrahim

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEdcuational Technology Systems
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBibliographic couplingCitationBibliometricsComputer scienceVariety (cybernetics)Data scienceSection (typography)Scientific literatureCitation analysisManagement scienceLibrary scienceEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bibliometric analysis is an essential statistical tool to map the state of the art in a given area of scientific knowledge. Bibliometric is one family of measures that uses a variety of approaches for counting publication, citation, co-citation, bibliographic coupling, keyword co-occurrence, and co-authorship networks. Bibliometric methods involve the use of several tools that can help researchers to identify a relevant and current research problem. Bibliometric paper can be written before writing a literature review article and at the introduction section of any research papers. Researcher who develops a research project based on bibliometric analysis has the possibility of presenting the objectives and methods of his work clearly and concisely. In this workshop, you will learn “How to Use Bibliometric Study for Writing a Paper”.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0240.030
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEdcuational Technology SystemsFrench-language works237,207