MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047844082 · doi:10.4148/jft.v2i2.1514

Practitioner Profile: An Interview With Amanda Mills

2011· article· en· W2047844082 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amanda Mills

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Financial Therapy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCommunity Development and Social Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeelingBankruptcyNewspaperThe artsAuditPublic relationsManagementPovertyWitnessCertificateSociologyPsychologyMedia studiesPolitical scienceLawEconomicsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For more than 25 years, Amanda Mills has been working with arts organizations across Canada and with artists of all kinds to assist them in achieving financial sanity. She has taught business management at the University of Victoria and has prepared thousands of tax returns for writers, visual artists, choreographers, actors, filmmakers, broadcasters, and creative entrepreneurs. Ten years ago, bringing together her work on trauma, with twenty years of business management, Mills founded Loose Change Financial Therapy – the place where money and feelings meet. Mills has presented Loose Change workshops for social workers, teachers, psychotherapists, artists, anti-poverty activists, sex trade workers, women’s groups, and the general public. She has been a guest on major Canadian radio and television broadcasts and profiled in many major Canadian newspapers and periodicals. Mills is also a crisis counselor and co-wrote a bestselling book on recovering from trauma. A tax professional and business manager, she is certified as a financial counselor under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. Mills is also currently completing a certificate in mediation.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0190.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0080.017
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.136
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.134 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Financial TherapySame topicCommunity Development and Social ImpactFrench-language works237,207