MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7036271530

Barker, Kinsey R. : Advertising Content in Niche Magazines: A Content Analysis of the Quarter Horse Journal

2008· book· en· W7036271530 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library) · 2008
Typebook
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Content analysisContent (measure theory)Horse racingAdvertising campaign
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little to no information encompassing advertising content and the equine field, namely that of publications like The Quarter Horse Journal, or more commonly known as The Journal, exist. Advertising seeks to persuade and magazines are an avenue by which a certain group is targeted. Advertising in magazines is a beneficial relationship for the publication, the advertisers, and the target market. This study explores that relationship.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.006

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.111 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiblioBoard Library Catalog (Open Research Library)Same topicPlant Taxonomy and PhylogeneticsFrench-language works237,207