MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6891763367 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1401.2126

Editorial

2014· preprint· en· W6891763367 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Conflict Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnnalsChoseTerrorismPublic policyPresentation (obstetrics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clauset and Woodard (2013) ask, "What is the likelihood of another September 11th-sized or larger terrorist event, worldwide, over the next decade?" This question has implications for numerous policy arenas - national security, international relations, public safety, disaster preparedness, and so on - but it also has resonance for any individual who remembers 9/11. Thus, the Area Editors chose this paper to engage the audience at the 2013 Joint Statistical Meetings (JSM) in Montreal. The discussions in this issue of The Annals of Applied Statistics include those presented formally at JSM 2013 as well as others from individuals who were unable to attend JSM 2013 or who contributed discussions after the meeting.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0860.055

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.133 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicHealth and Conflict StudiesFrench-language works237,207