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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.283
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