MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7025107192

Using a narrative-based approach as a safeguard against bias related harm in algorithmic tools and services

2023· article· en· W7025107192 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicChemical Analysis and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSafeguardHarmMultinational corporationKey (lock)Data Protection Act 1998
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ubiquity of algorithmic tools and services (ATS) in spatial data science has led to increased concerns about the biases they carry. This vision paper explores the biases inherent in ATS, encompassing computational, statistical, human, and systemic biases, and those compounded by multinational corporations. It underscores the imperative to address these biases, advocating a narrative-based approach to counteract them and promote equitable outcomes. This approach not only heightens awareness of embedded biases but also charts a course toward their mitigation.

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)0.078
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.143
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0780.143
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.028
Scholarly communication0.0220.032
Open science0.0040.020
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.204 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicChemical Analysis and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207