Bibliographic record
Abstract
The RC 19 program for next year’s ISA World Congress in Gothenburg is nearing completion. The deadline for submitting abstracts has now past, and Program Coordinators Sheila Shaver and Siri Hettige are working with session organizers to complete the planning. There will be a full program of sessions running throughout the Congress week. There will also be an RC 19 dinner. PRESIDENTIAL LETTER Dear colleagues: I am writing at the very end of my second term as your President, having enjoyed almost eight years of working with you to make RC19 one of the most interesting research committees of the ISA, and certainly one of the liveliest and most collegial. We should be proud of our collective dedication to the academic enterprise of comparative analysis of systems of social provision and regulation and the development of social theory—on display yet again at our most recent conference in Montreal organized by Jane Jenson, Rianne Mahon and Deena White. We can look forward to more excellent workshops in the years to come, Seoul in 2011 (to be organized by board member Huck-ju Kwon) and, most probably Budapest in 2012. I'm sure we will also enjoy our committee's program as part of the larger ISA gathering this coming summer in
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.487 | 0.390 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".