MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7111487308

Forecasting Accurately in Space and Time (FAST): Approach and Method

2025· preprint· W7111487308 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSocArXiv (OSF Preprints) · 2025
Typepreprint
Language
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicForecasting Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Space (punctuation)Competition (biology)GridKey (lock)Measure (data warehouse)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This memo details the methods that the Université de Montréal team employed in the Fast Forward competition hosted by IDEaS. While the FAST project was headquartered at Université de Montréal, its members at UT-Dallas and West Virginia University led the predictive modeling. Separate teams (led by Brandt and D'Orazio respectively) developed the country and grid month forecasts, and a third (Margulies, McLauchlin and Patterson) developed our machine-generated explanations. All our work is open-source and replicable, with forecasts publicly available on Github.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.149
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocArXiv (OSF Preprints)Same topicForecasting Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207