MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6887905845 · doi:10.17811/ebl.8.1.2019.1-6

Editorial Note

2020· article· es· W6887905845 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueConsultation of the Doctoral Thesis Database (TESEO) (Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte) · 2020
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal case studies and regulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade de VigoSyddansk UniversitetUniversidad Carlos III de MadridUniversità di BolognaUniversitat de GironaUniversity of MacedoniaUniversitat de BarcelonaUniversity of ConnecticutWest Virginia UniversityUniversità BocconiQueen Mary University of LondonUniversity of DundeeInstitut National de la Recherche AgronomiqueLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceUniversidad de OviedoMcMaster University
KeywordsNatural (archaeology)Work (physics)Context (archaeology)Government (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IndexingEconomics and Business Letters (EBL), launched in 2012, is indexed in ESCI -Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science) from 2015 and in Scopus from 2017.We expect its first SJR score for 2018 in Spring 2019.EBL was also included in the Academic Journal Guide 2018 among the 336 journals selected for the category "Economics, Econometrics and Statistics" with 1*.Finally, EBL is included in Econlit since 2017. StatisticsTable 1 summarizes the submissions since 2012.We have handled 446 manuscripts, with an acceptance rate of 35.32 per cent.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.290 · 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