MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394934006 · doi:10.32370/ia_2024_01_4

Methods of Technical Protection of Goods and Packaging from Counterfeiting, as well as the Issue of Professional Errors in the Investigation of Physical Evidence

2024· article· en· W4394934006 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nataliia Pavlovska, Anna Myrovska, Olha Nesen, Lesia Patyk, Olena Kofanova

Bibliographic record

VenueIntellectual Archive · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEconomic and Technological Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessProfessional standardsRisk analysis (engineering)Engineering ethicsCommerceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses the technical issue of protecting goods and packaging from counterfeiting. And the issue of professional and forensic errors during the research of material evidence is investigated.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.126
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.126
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.016
Scholarly communication0.0110.011
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.272 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntellectual ArchiveSame topicEconomic and Technological Systems AnalysisFrench-language works237,207