MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002609791 · doi:10.5465/amr.2005.16387883

Reflections on Engendering a Sustainable Community Within the Academy

2005· article· en· W2002609791 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

VenueAcademy of Management Review · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicManagement and Marketing Education
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity (politics)SociologyEthnic groupOrder (exchange)Sustainable communityDiversity managementPublic relationsSustainable developmentManagementEnvironmental ethicsPolitical scienceLawBusinessAnthropologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses views on engendering a sustainable community within the Academy of Management. Statistics are given on diversity within the Academy, which has over 15,000 members from over 90 countries throughout the world. The author feels that, in order for the Academy to foster the true spirit of diversity, it must first broaden its range of offerings and become more welcoming of differences. To build and foster a truly sustainable community, she claims, the members of the Academy must be fully aware of the need to accommodate the diverse aspirations of all interest groups in striving to meet goals. Differences between the Academy's members are listed, including religion, ethnicity, and occupation.

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.854
Threshold uncertainty score0.773

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.277 · 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