MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402348304 · doi:10.5206/tjr.2017.1.5.5

“Doing the research I do has left scars”

2017· article· en· W4402348304 on OpenAlex
Olivera Simić

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransitional justice review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCambodian History and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransitional justiceField (mathematics)ScarsField researchPolitical scienceEconomic JusticeSociologyMedicineSocial scienceLawSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transitional justice research involves critical examination of difficult topics that can raise ethical and methodological issues for participants and for researchers. Empirical research is a common approach to transitional justice studies in the field, yet researchers’ accounts of the tensions that can arise when undertaking research in politically sensitive environments are largely missing from the scholarly literature. Informed by the insights of scholars and researchers who work in the transitional justice field, this paper aims to open discussion about the myriad ways that researching sensitive topics may affect researchers, and to bring attention to strategies used by researchers to negotiate these challenges. The paper concludes with some suggestions for improving the wellbeing of researchers when working with difficult topics in the field.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0100.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.231
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.224 · 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