MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412317969

Lexical diversity as an indicator of journal scope

2019· article· en· W4412317969 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Mongeon, Maxime Sainte-Marie, Marc Simard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
Topiclinguistics and terminology studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)Diversity (politics)LinguisticsGeographySociologyInformation retrievalComputer scienceAnthropologyPhilosophyProgramming language
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work-in-progress proposes that the semantic similarity of articles published in a journal can be used to quantify the scope of the journal. Preliminary results of an analysis of a set of Library and Information Science (LIS) journals show that journals with a known broader scope have flatter, left-skewed similarity distributions, with lower averages, that can be used to identify the papers that best fit the journals in which they are published. Finally, we find different patterns regarding the evolution over time of the journals’ scope.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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)0.0070.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topiclinguistics and terminology studiesFrench-language works237,207