MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027883192 · doi:10.5130/ijcre.v4i0.1758

It’s the Basement Stories, not the Belt: Lessons from a community-university knowledge mobilisation collaboration

2011· article· en· W2027883192 on OpenAlexaff
David Phipps, Daniele Zanotti

Bibliographic record

VenueGateways International Journal of Community Research and Engagement · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityPanacea (medicine)General partnershipPublic relationsPolitical scienceSociologyPublic administrationLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2006, United Way of York Region and York University have been collaborating to support community-university knowledge mobilisation and research collaborations that serve the human service needs of citizens in York Region. Ours is a sustained and sustainable community-university collaboration. What makes us sustainable? Certainly there is no single sustainability panacea (‘do this and you to will have a sustainable community-university collaboration’) but, in general, if you pay attention to the little details, the big things (like sustainability) will take care of themselves. Looking back we realise that the journey (our evolving collaboration) is more important than the destination (sustainability). We share our journey by interpreting a story about a family trip one of us (Daniele) made to see relatives. What happened when Daniele visited his relatives is an allegory for our community-university knowledge mobilisation story and is instructive for those forging community-university collaborations. We illustrate each of the lessons with examples from our experience. Keywords Community-university collaboration, knowledge mobilisation, shared history, evolution of partnership, sustainability

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0580.044
Scholarly communication0.0230.029
Open science0.0040.030
Research integrity0.0080.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.425
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.029 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGateways International Journal of Community Research and EngagementSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207