MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2390215814

On the Characteristics of University Senate in Canada

2009· article· en· W2390215814 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jun Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueDaxue jiaoyu kexue · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Administration and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterCorporate governancePolitical sciencePublic administrationFoundation (evidence)ManagementLawEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada,many universities have implemented the advisory council system.It takes the corporate governance structure of Canadian Universities as the foundation,forms under the clear provisions in the charter of the University,and then develops into one kind of standard university system.The senates in Canada's universities go through centuries of development and growth,and now have formed its own characteristics.This paper will base on the analysis of university governance structure in Canada,elaborate the characteristics of the senates,and explore its origination,finally sum up the example significance to our country.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.012
Science and technology studies0.0180.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDaxue jiaoyu kexueSame topicPublic Administration and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207