MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7061562945

Procederen tegen onbekende partijen : in hoeverre verschaft het huidige, wettelijke kader van het Nederlandse civiele procesrecht voldoende mogelijkheden en waarborgen bij het procederen tegen een anonieme wederpartij, en zou lering getrokken kunnen worden uit (aspecten van) de leerstukken omtrent het procederen tegen anonieme partijen van de rechtsstelsels van Engeland en Canada ter wijziging van de Nederlandse dagvaardingsprocedure?

2022· dissertation· nl· W7061562945 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTheses database, Tilburg University · 2022
Typedissertation
Languagenl
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Work (physics)Subject (documents)Quality (philosophy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex
No abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.

No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueTheses database, Tilburg UniversitySame topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207