MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396624268 · doi:10.32388/44kcvv

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

2024· peer-review· en· W4396624268 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Antonio Peláez Verdet

Bibliographic record

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

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Potential competing interests: No potential competing interests to declare.Despite being well structured and easy to read, the paper lacks several issues that need to be improved in order to be properly considered for publication.First, references should be provided so the readers could know how far and how this item has been researched.Secondly, the documents used have been selected in a way that should be properly explained, by providing an accurate methodology that is missing.Thirdly, and most importantly, the analysis performed seems pretty much like an exploratory, preliminary study, rather than a conclusive method.Ideally, the authors should have focused on

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.098
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.928

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.098
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0140.015
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0740.019

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
GenreCommentary

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→