Revues savantes canadiennes/Canadian scholarly journals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Métadonnées des revues savantes canadiennes, y compris des revues actives et des revues ayant cessé la publication. Pour être incluses, les revues répertoriées : sont savantes, c'est-à-dire elles ont intégré un examen par les pairs ou une révision éditoriale, et être périodiques; sont principalement gérées par une institution, une association ou une société basée au Canada; sont identifiables par un ISSN; semblent légitimes, c'est-à-dire qu'elles ne doivent pas être associées à des éditeurs « prédateurs » ou ayant des pratiques douteuses. Des mises à jour et corrections des données peuvent être communiquées en utilisant la fonction « commentaire » dans la feuille de calcul Google qui présente les données en évolution. Metadata of Canadian scholarly journals, including active and ceased journals. All journals listed: are scholarly, including peer- or editorial review, and periodical; are mainly managed from within a Canada-based institution, association or society; have an ISSN associated; appear legitimate, i.e. journals are not associated with 'predatory' publishers or publishers known to have questionable practices. Updates and corrections to the data can be communicated using the “comment” function of the Google spreadsheet containing the dynamic dataset.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.027 | 0.085 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.054 | 0.077 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.030 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.100 | 0.036 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".