Research Magazine Winter 2010 - Focus on Transdisciplinary Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this issue: Research in the spotlight; A reflection from the College of Arts; Digital art takes over Toronto; A winding walk through immersive theatre; A shakespeare experiment; Flashback photography; Audoscience research, remastered; A guelph guitar with cultural significance; Communities grow closer with musical improvisation; Songs in the stars; We're lichen these tunes; Adaptive-use musical instruments cross barriers; Equity examined on stage; Research communication starts with a SPARK; A look at bilingualism in Canada; What difference does a revolution make? Cultures across Canada; Agriculture makes use of popular technology; Live magic, wonder and illusion; The reasons for science; Digitized and humanized; Yesterday's Canadians, today; Science, served up; A kink in the global coffee chain; Sustaining Ontario's No.1 crop; Help for the honeybee; Elephant memories; Connecting human, animal and environmental health; Stem cells for horses and humans; the science-arts partnership explained; Retrospect: Getting the point across
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 | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.173 | 0.074 |
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".