MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408384877 · doi:10.1111/johs.12492

Domestic Misfits, Social Physics and the Problem of International Statistical Standardization

2025· article· en· W4408384877 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociology Lens · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCensus and Population Estimation
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandardizationInternational standardizationPolitical scienceRegional scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT During the 19th century, driven by the ideas of Adolphe Quetelet, population statistics were actively being developed and debated by many nascent nation‐states. The International Statistical Institute (ISI) was one of the premier statistical organizations of the 19th and 20th centuries that possessed a very international and prestigious membership including representatives from across Europe, Latin America and Japan. During this “first principles” period, statisticians were openly grappling with both the practical questions related to the “conditions of production” of data as well as questions of statistical theory and good practice. This article analyzes some of the debate the ISI held on the problem of international social statistical category standardization that the ISI encountered as well as the factors and “tests” they used to resolve these issues.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.337 · 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