MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Correction: Future Circular Collider Feasibility Study Report

2025· article· en· W4416361161 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

VenueThe European Physical Journal Special Topics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Science and Diplomacy
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)Queen's UniversityCanadian Light Source (Canada)Institute of Particle PhysicsGDG EnvironnementCarleton UniversityTRIUMF
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColliderFocus (optics)Field (mathematics)Reflection (computer programming)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Correction: Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjs/s11734-025-01958-5<br/><br/>The Image Sources and Credits information section was missing from this article and should have read ‘The FCC Project formally acknowledges and credits all organisations and contributors whose data and imagery form part of the basemaps used in this work. These include © Esri, Airbus DS, FAO, FEMA, GSA, NASA, NGA, NOAA, USGS, CGIAR, NCEAS, Rijkswaterstaat, SITG – State of Geneva (CH), swisstopo, Facebook, Garmin, Geoland, Geodatastyrelsen, Google, Intermap, Maxar, Microsoft, N Robinson, NLS, NMA, OS, Planet, TomTom, as well as © OpenStreetMap contributors, Esri Community Maps contributors, and the GIS User Community.<br/><br/>Every effort has been made to correctly acknowledge all data providers and rights holders. Any omission is unintentional, and the FCC Project remains available to review and amend credits upon request from legitimate data owners.’<br/><br/>The original article has been corrected.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.335 · 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