MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398955343 · doi:10.7910/dvn/rmfll4

#metoo Digital Media Collection - First quarter 2021

2023· dataset· en· W4398955343 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zachary Maiorana, Pablo Morales Henry, Jennifer Weintraub

Bibliographic record

VenueHarvard Dataverse · 2023
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDigital and Traditional Archives Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Computer scienceHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset contains the tweet ids of 765,260 tweets, including tweets between January 1, 2021 and March 31, 2021. This collection is a subset of the Schlesinger Library #metoo Digital Media Collection. These tweets were collected weekly from the Twitter API through Social Feed Manager using the POST statuses/filter method of the Twitter Stream API. Please note that there will be no updates to this dataset. The following list of terms includes the hashtags used to collect data for this dataset: #metoo, #timesup, #metoostem, #sciencetoo, #metoophd, #shittymediamen, #churchtoo, #ustoo, #metooMVMT, #ARmetoo, #TimesUpAR, #metooSociology, #metooSexScience, #timesupAcademia, and #metooMedicine. Be aware that previous quarters (up to the first quarter of 2020) only include one hashtag: #metoo. Per Twitter's Developer Policy, tweet ids may be publicly shared for academic purposes; tweets may not. Therefore, this dataset only contains tweet ids. In order to retrieve tweets that are still available (not deleted by users) tools like Hydrator are available. There are similar subsets related to the Schlesinger Library #metoo Digital Media Collection available by quarter, as well as a full dataset with a larger corpus of hashtags.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.125

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.174 · 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
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 venueHarvard DataverseSame topicDigital and Traditional Archives ManagementFrench-language works237,207