MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406012041 · doi:10.56238/arev7n1-022

CRIAÇÃO DE CONHECIMENTO NAS REDES DE COOPERAÇÃO DAS ORGANIZAÇÕES: UMA REVISÃO INTEGRATIVA

2025· article· pt· W4406012041 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAracê. · 2025
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicBusiness and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O objetivo da pesquisa foi identificar as principais ferramentas utilizadas pelas redes de cooperação publicadas na base de dados da Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) entre 2012 a 2022. A pesquisa identificou que a maioria dos estudos, no total 11, foram publicados em espanhol e a principal ferramenta utilizada pelas organizações é a internet que serve de intermediário para o processo, como por exemplo, armazenar informações de serviços públicos de saúde, ambientado em um modelo na gestão de conhecimento e na tomada de decisão, ou também para dialogar por meio de uma interdisciplinaridade apoiadas pela TIC.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.013
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0260.030
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.343 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAracê.Same topicBusiness and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207