← Back to cohort
<scp><i>CAR</i></scp> Ad Hoc Reviewers 2023/<scp><i>RCC</i></scp> Réviseurs ad hoc 2023
Bibliographic record
VenueContemporary Accounting Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAcademic Publishing and Open Access
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Washington BothellIndiana University BloomingtonBinghamton UniversityUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillUniversity of California, DavisCity, University of LondonUniversity of Colorado BoulderCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignStony Brook UniversitySingapore Management UniversityCalifornia State University Long BeachNanjing UniversityShanghai University of Finance and EconomicsUniversiteit AntwerpenYale UniversityUniversiteit van TilburgYeshiva UniversityNational University of SingaporeUniversität ZürichMarquette UniversityUniversity of MissouriTsinghua UniversityUniversidad Carlos III de MadridUniversity of ConnecticutSimon Fraser UniversityConcordia UniversityUniversiteit van AmsterdamUtah Valley UniversityMonash UniversityDurham UniversityUniversity of WarwickUniversity of TorontoUniversity of AlbertaBentley UniversityCopenhagen Business SchoolFudan UniversityUniversidad del AtlánticoPeking UniversityUniversity of South CarolinaKU LeuvenUniversity of Massachusetts BostonUniversity of OregonFordham UniversityKennesaw State UniversitySanta Clara UniversityUniversity of PittsburghIowa State UniversityGeorge Washington UniversityUniversity of South FloridaVrije Universiteit AmsterdamUniversity of AkronBangor UniversityUniversity of Hawai'iUniversity of PennsylvaniaFlorida Atlantic UniversityMcGill UniversityHarvard UniversityGeorgia State UniversityDePaul UniversityUniversità BocconiNanyang Technological UniversityTexas Christian UniversityGeorgetown UniversityTel Aviv UniversityUniversiteit MaastrichtUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnUniversity of California, San DiegoSouthern Methodist UniversityUniversité LavalUniversity of MiamiBoston CollegeFlorida International UniversityCity University of Hong KongBaylor UniversityTulane UniversityArizona State UniversityUniversity of Notre DameHarvard Business SchoolUniversity of MinnesotaUniversidad de NavarraUniversity of GlasgowVanderbilt UniversityYork UniversityGeorge Mason UniversityDrexel UniversityRenmin University of ChinaUniversity of Texas at El PasoNorthern Illinois UniversityUniversity of RochesterVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityFlorida State UniversityColorado State UniversityUniversity of WollongongQueen Mary University of LondonNorthwestern UniversityTexas Tech UniversityNational Dong Hwa UniversityNewcastle UniversityMichigan State UniversityLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceVillanova UniversityUniversity of Illinois at ChicagoLehigh UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityUniversity of WashingtonEmory UniversityOhio State UniversityHong Kong Baptist UniversityClemson UniversityPurdue UniversityUniversity of OklahomaUniversity of Colorado DenverUniversity of Southern CaliforniaUniversity of CyprusBowling Green State University
KeywordsPost-hoc analysisChemistryComputer scienceMedicineInternal medicine
Abstract
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.
No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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)0.071
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.124
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.999
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.071 | 0.124 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.014 |
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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractno