MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7065908207

Evidence-based Practice in Developmental Disabilities:
\nWhat is it and Why Does it Matter?

2017· article· en· W7065908207 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExcellenceField (mathematics)Professional development
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Editors’ Note: As recipient of the 2005 OADD-RSIG Professional Award for Excellence in \nResearch, and Friday morning keynote speaker at the 2005 Annual OADD conference, \nAdrienne Perry spoke about the importance of evidence-based practice in the field of \ndevelopmental disabilities. This is a summary of that keynote address.

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)0.089
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.301
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0890.301
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.013
Scholarly communication0.0190.018
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0150.026
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
GenreCommentary

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 venueYork University Digital Library (York University)→Same topicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations→French-language works237,207→