Editor in Chief / Rédactrice en chef Karen R. Cohen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le magazine officiel de la Société canadienne de psychologie The Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) retains copyright of Psynopsis. Any articles published therein, by other than an officer, director or employee of the CPA, are strictly those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Cana-dian Psychological Association, its officers, directors, or employees. La Société canadienne de psychologie (SCP) conserve le droit d’auteur de Psynopsis. Tout article qui y est publié, autre que par un représentant, un directeur ou un em-ployé de la SCP, reflète strictement les opinions de l’auteur et non pas nécessairement celles de la Société canadienne de psychologie, de ses représentants, de sa direction ou de ses employés. Please send your articles to communications@cpa.ca. Submissions should be no more than 1000 words for articles that profile developments in science or practice and 400 words for “Have your Say ” submissions. Veuillez faire parvenir vos articles à
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 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.154 | 0.136 |
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".