MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188209162

THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF WINDSOR OFFICE OF THE CITY SOLICITOR

2012· article· en· W2188209162 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
George Wilkki, Shelby Askin Hager

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransport and Economic Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWindsorThursdayCorporationPurchasingChequeBusinessLawEconomic historyFinanceHistoryPolitical scienceComputer securityMarketingComputer scienceTheology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

REQUEST FOR QUOTE #JM-103012-01 STREET LIGHT POLE REPLACEMENT Dear Sir/Madam: Quotations, clearly marked as to contents will be received by Jennifer Musson, Senior Buyer, 400 City Hall Square East, Suite 403, Windsor, Ontario, N9A 7K6, up to and including ELEVEN-THIRTY FIFTY-NINE (11:30:59) A.M. (E.S.T), THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2012, to supply and install street light poles at various locations throughout the City of Windsor. The Contractor shall furnish a Security Deposit in the form of a certified cheque, bank draft, money order, or irrevocable letter of credit payable, in Canadian currency, to The Corporation of the City of Windsor in the amount of Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000.00) to be submitted with quotation. The Security Deposit of the successful bidder will be held as a performance security and released upon satisfactory job completion. Do not submit a Bid Bond. A bid bond is not acceptable for this RFQ. Specifications and form of quotation will be available at no charge at the Purchasing Division, 400 City Hall Square East, Suite 403, Windsor, Ontario, or email: purchasing@city.windsor.on.ca. There will be no public opening for this Request for Quotation. Acceptance or rejection of any quotation will be made in accordance with City of Windsor Purchasing By-Law No. 93-2012. Yours truly, THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF WINDSOR

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransport and Economic PoliciesFrench-language works237,207