MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400482653 · doi:10.55016/ojs/cpai.v4i2.74173

Student Voices in Academic Integrity

2021· article· en· W4400482653 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erin Hagen, Charlotte Sander

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Perspectives on Academic Integrity · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAcademic integrity and plagiarism
Canadian institutionsLangara College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcademic integrityResearch integrityAcademic dishonestyPsychologyEngineering ethicsCheatingSocial psychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the Spring 2021 semester, Langara College held a student contest inspired by a project created by a Dalhousie instructor, asking students to create fun, creative memes discussing the importance of academic integrity. The contest ran for two weeks, after which finalists were shortlisted and posted to the Langara College Instagram for the winners to be voted on by the College community. Starting with an introduction to the Academic Integrity Campaign and its goals, the presenters would discuss the goals of the contest and the contest outcomes, including the community interaction with the social media posts. Lastly, they would expand on the future goals of the contests and the campaign itself.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0050.042
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.325 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Perspectives on Academic IntegritySame topicAcademic integrity and plagiarismFrench-language works237,207