MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391194290 · doi:10.51644/9781771122054-001

Acknowledgements

2016· book-chapter· en· W4391194290 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman auditory perception and evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFederation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The list of people I truly wish to thank is a lengthy one.In the limited space allotted here, let me recognize the individuals who were directly involved in bringing the present work to fruition, and a few others near to me who made it possible.Thank you Donna Orwin, Robin Feuer Miller, and my professors at the University of Toronto, who held me to the highest standards of academic rigour during my doctoral studies.Thanks to Bill Barnett for his careful reading of an early draft of the manuscript and helpful suggestions, without which this book may never have seen the light of day.Special thanks to Caryl Emerson for reading the copy-

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.603
Threshold uncertainty score0.860

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3970.398

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.218 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman auditory perception and evaluation→French-language works237,207→