MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314400804 · doi:10.1300/j194v05n02_04

Intergenerational Programs

2007· article· en· W2314400804 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

VenueJournal of Intergenerational Relationships · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsNeighbourhood Pharmacy Association of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)State (computer science)Telephone surveyPsychologyPublic relationsSociologyMarketingBusinessPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The purpose of this research was to provide an overview of the current state of intergenerational programming in one Canadian city. One-hundred and seven individuals in charge of programming in youth and seniors' organizations completed a telephone survey about intergenerational programs. More than one-third of organizations surveyed reported offering intergenerational programs, and the majority of these perceived their program to be successful. Participants added that there were no current overlaps in services, though a variety of gaps in and barriers to intergenerational programming were identified. There was also significant interest in and ideas for offering a diverse range of programs in the future. It was concluded that while interest in offering intergenerational programs was high, multiple barriers currently exist to offering such programs.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.266 · 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