MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6898561492 · doi:10.57945/manara.25019768

Academic Integrity in Qatar: a Scoping Review

2024· other· en· W6898561492 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQatar National Library · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcademic integrityResearch integrityWork (physics)NarrativeQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This is a poster of work being carried out to answer the following questions:What literature (quantitative studies, qualitative studies, narrative articles, theses etc.) exploring academic integrity in Qatar is available?What major themes emerge from the existing literature?The poster was presented at the inaugural Asia-Middle East-Africa (AMEA) Conference on Academic Research Integrity (ACARI) in Dubai which took place from December 17 to December 19, 2023.Authors Faisa Farah, University of Calgary in Qatar Khadija Mahsud, University of Doha for Science and Technology Sarah E. Eaton, University of Calgary

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)0.070
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.142
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0700.142
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0320.030
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0100.009
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designSystematic review
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQatar National LibraryFrench-language works237,207