MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392018298 · doi:10.1002/leap.1599

The publication facts label: A public and professional guide for research articles

2024· article· en· W4392018298 on OpenAlex

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

VenueLearned Publishing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersStanford University
KeywordsPolitical scienceLibrary scienceEngineering ethicsComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Key points The expansion of open access entails a responsibility for supporting this public access with a guide to why, in an ‘Age of Misinformation’, research may be trustworthy. Such a guide can also provide a check on predatory journals, a fear of which may be unduly limiting researchers tapping into the expanding global scale of research activity. Journal publishing platforms offer opportunities for automating the gathering and presenting of relevant data for assessing journal adherence to scholarly standards. Industry organizations, such as ORCID, Crossref, and DOAJ, offer trust and verification networks that can be employed to further strengthen scholarly publishing integrity.

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)0.140
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.426
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1400.426
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0260.117
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.1430.009
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.815
GPT teacher head0.647
Teacher spread0.167 · 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