MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408458127 · doi:10.1029/2025jg008871

Honoring Our 2024 Reviewers: Advancing Excellence and Equity in <i>JGR Biogeosciences</i>

2025· article· en· W4408458127 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaojuan Feng, D. N. Huntzinger, Ben Bond‐Lamberty, Gil Bohrer, Marguerite A. Xenopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicResearch Data Management Practices
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellenceEquity (law)Political scienceMedia studiesPsychologyManagementSociologyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Peer review is a critical evaluation process, one that is time‐consuming but needed to maintain quality and credibility in science. At JGR Biogeosciences we are honoring the many 2024 reviewers who donated their time and expertise to ensure rigor, novelty, inclusiveness, and open practices for improving and advancing biogeosciences research.

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)0.198
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.541
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1980.541
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0100.009
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0510.014
Open science0.0070.013
Research integrity0.0130.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.083

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.339 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
DomainEvaluation
GenreEditorial

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research BiogeosciencesSame topicResearch Data Management PracticesFrench-language works237,207