MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510572283 · doi:10.7748/ns.21.2.31.s48

Nominations sought for rcn fellowship awards

2006· article· en· W2510572283 on OpenAlexaff
Tricia Harwood

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Standard · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsRoyal Canadian Navy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNOMINATENominationPolitical scienceClosing (real estate)Library scienceManagementMedicineLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Do you know of an RCN member who has made an outstanding contribution either to nursing or to the RCN? If so, there is an opportunity for you to nominate them for an award. The RCN is looking for nominations for RCN fellowships, honorary fellowships and the awards of merit. These honours are awarded by RCN council and will be given at congress 2007 in Harrogate. The nomination forms and guidance are available at the RCN website, www.rcn.org.uk . The closing date is November 16.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.842
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.420 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing StandardSame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207