MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7016167354

You've Finished Your Research...Now What?

2017· article· en· W7016167354 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of International Crisis and Risk Communication Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPublishing and Scholarly Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublicationPublishingJoin (topology)Column (typography)Quarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research is complete and you’ve written your findings, now you’re ready to join the scholarly conversation, but you want to make sure you publish it in the right place to fit your future plans. This workshop, held during Open Access Week, explores the publishing options available and the pros and cons of each model. Learn more about traditional scholarly publishing, open access options and utilizing institutional repositories to make your research widely available.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.128
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.385

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.128
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0170.019
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0050.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1150.118

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 head0.264
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.195 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of International Crisis and Risk Communication ResearchSame topicPublishing and Scholarly CommunicationFrench-language works237,207