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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A performance bond provides the assurance that an awarded construction project will be satisfactorily completed in the event that the contractor is unable to complete the project as agreed and the contract is terminated. First passed into U.S. law in the late 1800s, performance bonds protect against financial losses. The ability of contractors to provide a performance bond has mistakenly been assumed as a guarantee that contractors will perform well on the projects they are awarded. Indications are that there is a need to evaluate the benefits and the costs of using performance bonds. This paper examines the benefit–cost ratios of performance bonds on a national basis. Analysis was performed on state construction project data collected for contract awards from September 2007 to September 2009. The results of the analysis suggest that states with a small number of defaults, or none at all, did not benefit from having performance bonds, whereas those states with numerous defaults did benefit. In conclusion, the results suggest that performance bonds are beneficial to states that experience a large number of defaults.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it