MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2286591073 · doi:10.2478/joim-2014-0030

The Framework of Culture: a Frame for Work

2014· article· en· W2286591073 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intercultural Management · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Student and Expatriate Challenges
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersUniversiteit Maastricht
KeywordsPhysical cultureSociologyPerceptionEpistemologyOrganizational cultureFrame (networking)AestheticsPublic relationsPolitical scienceEngineeringPhilosophyMedicineMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Although culture has been discussed in quite some detail, it remains an elusive concept, whether on content or in terms of consequences. Indeed, culture does not exist in a physical form (although bumping your nose to culture may be a near physical experience) and may be rather considered as a label people use to describe patterns of thinking and acting of a group of people. Many studies of culture start from theory and move to implementation. This paper is based on an opposite approach. Its basis is the experience of 849 MA students with living and working abroad and the effects of culture in reality. In an inductive way this experience results in a mind-map of culture. The aim of this paper is to present a rather comprehensive perception of culture on the basis of experience; not to give an overview of what culture might be according to the literature. This concept is the initial result of an on-going programme at the R&D Centre of the Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences. Consecutive steps are briefly mentioned.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.313 · 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