MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978144777 · doi:10.1121/1.4788041

The Student Council

2005· article· en· W1978144777 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David Bradley

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSmart Materials for Construction
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresentation (obstetrics)Work (physics)Political scienceResearch councilState (computer science)Student engagementPublic relationsSociologyStudent activitiesMedical educationLibrary sciencePedagogyPsychologyMedicineEngineeringMathematics educationComputer scienceGovernment (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Throughout its history, the Society has been a strong advocate for students exploring the world of acoustics. However, only recently was that support institutionalized and the responsibility placed in the hands of the students themselves. In the spring of 2000, a nascent body was formed to address the needs and concerns of Student Members of the ASA. The Vancouver meeting marks the 5th anniversary of this group, now formally known as the Student Council. The Council has evolved markedly in the past several years. The Council is currently composed of one student representative from each of the 13 technical committees and one Student Chapter Liaison. Recent student focused activities include the creation of a state-of-the-art website, the production of the first in a series of fellowship/grant workshops, and the presentation of a new award honoring the efforts of mentors in the Society. The Councils main focus is disseminating information of concern to students, advocating participation of students in Society activities and meetings, and promoting Society membership benefits to potential student members. Current and future programming and opportunities available to students, and those who work with students, will be presented and discussed.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicSmart Materials for ConstructionFrench-language works237,207