MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7015605245

They have a league of their own, should they play in it?

2025· other· en· W7015605245 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternet Archive (Internet Archive) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionTSG101DemotionArticular cartilage damageHyporeflexiaDiafiltration
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Guest: Toronto Star columnist Dave FeschuckBetween the professional hockey leagues, a new professional soccer league and the new franchise in the professional basketball league, women's sports is flourishing in Toronto. Girls sports too - especially hockey, where enrolment of young girls is single-handedly driving growth in the sport. Today's girls, at the elite level, face future prospects their grandmothers could only have dreamed of, but that also means they face a choice: should they continue to play on teams with boys, in leagues dominated by boys? Or should they take advantage of the many girls leagues Ontario has to offer.Dave Feschuk and Kerry Gillespie recently wrote about that issue for the Star, and Feschuk joins host Edward Keenan (coach of a girls hockey team) to discuss the factors involved in making that choice, including where the strongest competition is, the potential value of playing with body contact, the social dimensions of the sport, and the avenues that exist to national or college teams.PLUS: Special guest Irene Keenan, the host's 16-year-old daughter, talks about her own experience playing alongside boys and in all-girls environments as both a hockey and baseball player.This episode was produced by Julia De Laurentiis Johnston, Ed Keenan and Paulo Marques.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.006

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.251 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternet Archive (Internet Archive)French-language works237,207