Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contract Management Principles and Practices was a 4 day webinar held on August 29, 30, 31 and September 1, 2011. There were 5 other participants, 2 others from within Canada and 2 from the USA. Due to the nature of the webinar, my participation was remote from AU Central, Athabasca, Alberta. The contents of this seminar was broken into 6 sections; • Introduction to Procurement Management • Project Analysis • Plan Procurements • Conduct Procurements • Administer Procurements • Close Procurements Contract Management Principles and Practices course work was well managed over the 4 days and informative, the instructor kept the right pace for the flow of the instruction. The webinar’s instructor was very knowledge regarding Canadian and US contract laws and regulations. The participating Canadian students also provided Canadian procurement issues and solutions. A classroom environment is preferred over a webinar, when the student has a chance to develop resource contacts for future networking.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.007 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".