MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2485257109 · doi:10.1002/9781119198048.ch15

Planning the Trip

2012· other· en· W2485257109 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman Resource Development and Performance Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingSession (web analytics)Plan (archaeology)Process (computing)Public relationsEngineeringProcess managementManagementPolitical scienceComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter discusses the roll-out of ABC process in Canadian National Railways (CN). A team was created in each region to support the rollout. Each worked from the same training script, but customized it for the local audience. The trainers cascaded the rollout of a three-day working session to help leaders get started. Topics included the case for change, the Five Guiding Principles, the ABC Toolkit, and plenty of time to plan and practice the change they intended to make. Coaches provided individualized and team coaching to help the tools come to life and help leaders become fluent in using them. Leaders reviewed their progress against results and determined what to do differently to improve performance long-term. As the roll-out was worked across the organization, it was found that some leaders took to the ABCs immediately while others took longer to adjust their leadership style to fit the new culture.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.897

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3710.200

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.293 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 topicHuman Resource Development and Performance EvaluationFrench-language works237,207