MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996202869 · doi:10.1177/1523422312446159

Community and Societal Development

2012· article· en· W1996202869 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
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCommunity Development and Social Impact
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunity developmentSociologyPublic relationsProcess managementPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsKnowledge managementBusinessEconomic growthComputer scienceEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Problem. Human Resource Development (HRD) scholars and practitioners need to address the problem of conceptualizing HRD in various community settings. The Solution. To address this need, the authors conducted a case study research to explore the role of HRD in developing the Ismaili community in Minnesota. Data analysis revealed four themes: (a) conceptualization of HRD in the Ismaili community of Minnesota, (b) history and examples of HRD efforts in this community, (c) the role of women in the community’s HRD efforts, and (d) the future of HRD in the Ismaili community of Minnesota. The use of HRD within this community was heavily focused on societal development of the community. The Stakeholders. Recommendations for HRD practice (practitioners) and research (researchers) suggest that HRD, especially within religious communities (members and leaders of such communities), be explored with an open mind for the purpose of creating a pluralistic and civil society (all citizens).

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.784

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.231 · 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