MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393677694 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.10031957

Parcellating the parcellation issue - a proof of concept for reproducible analyses using Neurolibre

2023· dataset· en· W4393677694 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Bellec, Saâd Jbabdi, R. Cameron Craddock

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2023
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Analysis with R
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProof of conceptComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dataset provided for NeuroLibre preprint. Author repo: https://github.com/pbellec/editorial_parcellation NeuroLibre fork:https://github.com/roboneurolibre/editorial_parcellation For details, please visit the corresponding NeuroLibre technical screening. https://neurolibre.org

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.005
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0610.101

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
DomainReproducibility
GenreDataset

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicData Analysis with RFrench-language works237,207