MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588928494

Lifelong learning as a source of well-being and successful aging

2014· article· pt· W1588928494 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueSérie-Estudos - Periódico do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Educação da UCDB · 2014
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Issues in Poland
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLifelong learningnobodyAdult educationPedagogyWork (physics)PsychologyQuality of life (healthcare)GerontologyMedical educationPublic relationsSociologyPolitical scienceMedicineComputer scienceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When we were born, we ‘received’ a script saying how our life would be. We would go to school, and then to the University, begin to work, marry, have children, then grandchildren and retire. What about after retirement? Nobody told us what to do for the next 20, 30, 40 years of our existence. In this scenario, education has an important role to keep older adults as active members in the society, incraesing their quality of life. This paper explores the importance of educational programs for older adults; it describes some of these programs; and discusses the importance and necessity for planning these educational programs, according to the target audience, their needs, and wishes. Finally, this paper offers some recommendations and conclusions about older adult education according to the existing literature. Key words: Lifelong Learning. Education for Older Adults. Educational Programs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.460
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.311 · 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