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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is the second study (hence, 2 in A2) in a set of four studies being conducted by two teams of researchers (hence, A in A2). The first pair of studies (A1 and B1) were conceptual replications of each other, launched in parallel. The second pair of studies (A2 and B2) are direct replications of the first pair of studies. At the time of this preregistration, Team A (this team) is planning to directly replicate Team B’s first study, and vice versa. The purpose of this preregistration is to describe how Team A will achieve a direct replication of Study B1, and in what ways the original study’s methodology and analysis plan will be altered. We will describe these alterations in methodology and analysis and provide an appendix with our materials. Information on the basic study design and variables can be found in the preregistration for Study B1. The preregistration for Team B’s original study can be found here: osf.io/cdzs5
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.465 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it