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
An extensive literature search of both peer-reviewed and grey literature databases will be performed to identify relevant information about the topic. A concept plan was developed in close collaboration with a librarian. This plan includes the following concepts: “childcare services” and “children with disabilities”. Databases relevant to our study topic were also identified (i.e., Medline (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), ERIC (EBSCO), Web of Science, PSYCInfo (Ovid), Academic Search and Education Source (EBSCO)), and appropriate keywords were identified. Keywords and writing rules (e.g., truncation, quotation marks, Boolean operators) were adapted to each database. Our search strategies are attached. The librarian has searched the databases in May 2023. The data will be imported from the databases in Endnote reference management software. Then, references will be exported to Covidence systematic review software (www.covidence.org), where duplicates will be removed automatically based on the title of the references.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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