MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765163908 · doi:10.1002/9781119067825.ch6

THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE BOARDS OF GEOLOGY (ASBOG)

2017· other· en· W2765163908 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. W. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueSpecial publications · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics in Clinical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfessional associationCurriculumInclusion (mineral)State (computer science)Library sciencePolitical scienceProfessional ethicsProfessional conductEngineering ethicsMedical educationPublic relationsSociologyMedicineEngineeringLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Association of State Boards of Geology (ASBOG®) was founded in 1988 to provide oversight and coordination for state licensing boards for the geosciences. Currently, 30 states and Puerto Rico are members of ASBOG, which has coordination responsibility for approximately 40,000 licensees. Twice a year, two examinations, Fundamentals of Geology and Practice of Geology, are administered by ASBOG to evaluate the qualification of candidates for licensing in the member states. The exam content is driven by surveys of the practicing licensed professionals and academicians [Williams et al., 2012]. Professional ethics is regarded as extremely important by survey responses of all components of the geoscience community, including practicing licensed geologists in Canada and the United States, and members of the academic community. There is general agreement among these practitioners as to the relative importance of different elements of professional ethics and the frequency of these issues encountered in daily activities. Comparison of results of the surveys between administrations in 2010 [Warner and Warner, 2010] and 2015 [Warner, 2015] indicate little change in the attitudes of practicing geologists toward professional ethics. Recognizing the importance of professional ethics in the geosciences, ASBOG is promoting the inclusion of professional ethics in the college geoscience curriculum in addition to encouraging the instruction of practicing professionals [Williams, 2013; Williams, 2014].

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.014

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 head0.283
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpecial publicationsSame topicEthics in Clinical ResearchFrench-language works237,207