MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6907836394 · doi:10.25384/sage.20099485

sj-pdf-1-ijq-10.1177_16094069221108035 – Supplemental Material for Data Analyses using the Action Project Method Coding Technique: A Guide

2022· article· en· W6907836394 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Research Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoding (social sciences)Data collectionAction (physics)Action researchQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supplemental Material sj-pdf-1-ijq-10.1177_16094069221108035 for Data Analyses using the Action Project Method Coding Technique: A Guide by Charlotte Jensen, Matthias Hoben, Stephanie A. Chamberlain, Sheila Marshall, Richard A. Young and Andrea Gruneir in International Journal of Qualitative Methods

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.000

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 head0.752
GPT teacher head0.702
Teacher spread0.050 · 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