Replication data for Identifying science in the news
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This data set contains the data and codebook required to replicate the study "Identifying science in the news: An assessment of the precision and recall of Altmetric.com news mention data." It includes two data sets, both of which contain a collection of news stories published in the science and health sections of the following eight news media outlets during March-April 2021: The Guardian (Science Section), HealthDay, IFLScience, MedPage Today, News Medical, New York Times (Science Section), Popular Science, and Wired. The first data set (altmetric_dataset.csv) was obtained by downloading all of the news stories that mentioned research using the Altmetric Explorer. The second data set (content_analysis_dataset.csv) was obtained by collecting a random sample of 400 news stories from these 8 sources and manually identifying mentions of research within them. The codebook (news_mention_codebook.pdf) contains the coding instructions that were used to identify the mentions of research in content_analysis_dataset.csv.
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 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.026 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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.
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".