Ottawa Parmi Les Technopoles Nord-Americaines : Mythe Ou realite?/"Ottawa among North American Technopoles: Myth or Reality?" *
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This survey is based on a questionnaire sent to all 517 interns in Norway in December 1990, of whom 93% replied. Ten interns were interviewed personally. The majority felt they received a good theoretical basis during their medical studies, but less than a third stated that the education had adequate vocational orientation. Students from the University of Tromsø, were the exception in this respect. They were more positive towards the vocational aspects of their studies. Most interns had high expectations with regard to learning during internship, and half of them to have to face various traumatic experiences during this period. One out of two stated that, so far, their internship training had been inspiring for their career as medical practitioner. About a third replied that they doubted whether they would choose the same profession if they were to make this decision again. The results of this study emphasize the importance of the current changes in the curriculum at all four medical faculties in Norway. The results also suggest a need for better coordination of university studies and internship, and more structured teaching during the internship.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".