MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982211908 · doi:10.1177/1523422312446147

Capacity Building for Societal Development

2012· article· en· W1982211908 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

VenueAdvances in Developing Human Resources · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPoverty, Education, and Child Welfare
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapacity buildingBusinessEngineering ethicsProcess managementArchitectural engineeringPolitical sciencePublic relationsEconomic growthEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Problem. Traditionally, the core of human resource development (HRD) has focused on corporate settings and emerged primarily in the United States. The Solution. As the concept has evolved and moved around the world in response to factors supporting globalization, and as academics and practitioners have argued about its definition, HRD has begun to be applied much more broadly, including with geographically dispersed communities and nations. This article presents case studies in which HRD principles and theories have been used for societal development—the general improvement of the welfare of people usually outside of the workplace, primarily in communities. At least one of the coauthors, and usually two or more, have been either involved in or reported on all of the cases included. The Stakeholders. It is critical for HRD academics and practitioners to understand this evolving, broad-based perspective of HRD and participate in its practice, theory development, and research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.302 · 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