MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966646153 · doi:10.1177/002087280004300306

Remote, northern communities

2000· article· en· W1966646153 on OpenAlexaffabout
Glen Schmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Social Work · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Social workContext (archaeology)GeographySociologyEnvironmental planningEconomic growthRegional sciencePolitical scienceEngineeringArchaeologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existing models of social work practice do not adequately address the needs of people living in remote, northern communities. This article examines the concept of “north” in a Canadian context and the northern application of social work practice models that are forged in industrialized urban settings. Social development is examined as an enabling model, as applicable to Canada’s north as it is to developing countries.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 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

Citations32
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Social WorkSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207