MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139457845 · doi:10.1287/inte.1040.0097

Improving Volunteer Scheduling for the Edmonton Folk Festival

2004· article· en· W2139457845 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScheduling and Timetabling Solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrewEntertainmentAdvertisingScheduling (production processes)Operations managementBusinessOperations researchMarketingPsychologyEngineeringAeronauticsArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The annual Edmonton Folk Music Festival is run almost entirely by its 1,800 volunteers. While people are usually enticed into volunteering for the folk fest by perks, such as free access to the entertainment, gourmet meals, and T-shirts, their willingness to return year after year depends on an intangible degree of satisfaction. In spring 2003, a crew coordinator sought to automate the scheduling process for his crew of about 35 volunteers to save time and to accommodate volunteers' preferences when possible. We developed a spreadsheet-based decision-support tool that generated shift times, scheduled volunteers according to various constraints and preferences, and produced master and individual schedules.

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.271 · 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