BioéthiqueOnline: Moving to Peer-Review / BioéthiqueOnline : Passage à l’évaluation par les pairs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
révision par les pairs Peer-review An open invitationThrough these changes, BioéthiqueOnline continues to pursue its goal of becoming a sustainable and reputable online journal that will stimulate its readership with engaging, topical and thought-provoking bioethics content.Another of our goals is to encourage our readers and authors (students, professors and researchers) to participate actively in dialogue amongst the Canadian and international bioethics communities, so that bioethics research in bioethics, in French and English, can be debated and questioned by a diversity of stakeholders.It is thus with great pleasure that BioéthiqueOnline invites the bioethics community to submit articles for peer-review.
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 | 0.287 | 0.548 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.036 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.018 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".