MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394956624 · doi:10.32388/27obs0

Review of: "Mapping the Canadian Research Landscape in 2023"

2024· peer-review· en· W4394956624 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Madhvee Madhou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyEnvironmental sciencePhysical geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Potential competing interests: No potential competing interests to declare. This is an interesting and informative article that allows an analysis of the research landscape using bibliometrics. It can be used to develop policies to enhance research. However, it might be worthwhile analysing the number of researchers in the institutions relative to the number of publications for a better analysis. The article focuses on universities, but it might be worthwhile mentioning if there are other centres that also contribute to the publication output of Canada.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.074
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.712

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.074
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.012
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.015

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 head0.876
GPT teacher head0.669
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
DomainEvaluation
GenreReview

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 topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research→French-language works237,207→