A Relative Impact Ranking of Political Studies in Ireland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Against a background of the Irish government?s concerns with Key Performance\nIndicators (KPIs) and the British government?s wishes for a more quantitative Research\nAssessment Exercise (RAE), our study conducts a relative impact assessment of the study of\npolitics, government, political science, and international relations in Ireland. Impact is measured\nas citations from the publications of permanent staff in eight Irish politics departments, based on\ndata compiled in April 2008 from two leading academic indexes ? ISI?s Web of Science and Scopus\n? as well as the now popular Google Scholar. We discuss some of the criticisms that naturally arise\nin a study of this nature. Then, following similar exercises in other disciplines (e.g. economics), we\nuse the impact measures to compare and rank individual scholars as well as departments. We also\nexplore the extent to which the choice of different indexes, and different measures, influences the\nresults that we obtain. While there are differences, in particular between indexes based purely on\narticles and those that access books and other material, the results from the different indexes are\nstrongly correlated.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".