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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The existing body of literature on teamwork behaviors is substantial and offers many different conceptualizations. However, there is a lack of consensus concerning the conceptual structure of teamwork behaviors. Many researchers pursue their own work without any attempt to build on and integrate the work of others. This article reviews the frameworks of teamwork behaviors in the literature on work teams and provides a way of integrating these frameworks. The behavioral dimensions included in this integrative framework are conceptually distinguished and arranged in a hierarchical conceptual structure based on theoretical approaches. Moreover, they are framed from the perspective of the timing of teamwork behaviors to clarify when these behaviors are most likely to have their intended effects. The proposed framework is then connected to the task conditions under which teamwork behaviors are most likely to facilitate collective task accomplishment. Finally, future directions for research regarding teamwork behaviors are discussed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it