MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W996734308 · doi:10.3819/ccbr.2015.100006

A social history of the founding of the Conference on Comparative Cognition and the Comparative Cognition Society

2015· article· en· W996734308 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ronald G. Weisman, Mark E. Bouton, Marcia L. Spetch, Edward A. Wasserman

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Science and Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconCognitionPsychologyComparative cognitionSocial cognitionCognitive scienceNeuroscienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<img class=alignright size-full wp-image-988 alt=ccbr_vol10_weisman_bouton_spetch_wasserman_icon src=https://comparative-cognition-and-behavior-reviews.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/ccbr_vol10_weisman_bouton_spetch_wasserman_icon.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.017
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.003

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 head0.461
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.056 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComparative Cognition & Behavior ReviewsSame topicCognitive Science and MappingFrench-language works237,207