MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148187673

Conflict of Interest in University Technology Transfer

2012· article· en· W2148187673 on OpenAlexafffund
Ghislaine Mathieu

Bibliographic record

VenuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conflicts of interest (COI) and commitment in universities are not only issues limited to university researchers; they may become issues for individuals’ professional actions or decisions at the level of administrative staff. For example, people associated with technology transfer licensing also need to be alert to COI, and to ensure they take appropriate measures to meet their commitments and work in line with the interests of their employer (the University) and the researchers with whom they work.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.164
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.164
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.008

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.155 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapyrus : Institutional Repository (Université de Montréal)Same topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207