MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805799488 · doi:10.2118/0618-0010-jpt

Community Consensus: Volunteerism - The SPE Strength That Lets Me Sleep Soundly at Night

2018· article· en· W2805799488 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Darcy Spady

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petroleum Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Education, Practice, and Leadership
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionWorryPsychologyPolitical sciencePublic relationsMedia studiesHistorySociologyArt historyPsychiatryAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

President's column We have a strong future, thanks to hard-working young members What keeps you awake at night? That is a question often posed by one of my favorite SPE presidents ever, Helge Hove Haldorsen. Of course, he was usually referring to an area of risk or danger. I ask that question of myself often. Sometimes I even answer myself. But today I want to turn that question around—what helps you sleep at night? For me, it’s knowing that the future of SPE is safe in the hands of the Millennial generation. Yes, the Millennials. Contrary to what you may have been led to believe, our young professionals are enterprising volunteers. Globally, this group is bringing volunteerism to new heights because they believe in blending their personal and professional lives to help others. Recently, I witnessed one of the best volunteerism demonstrations across our organization: the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) section’s Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition hosted yearly in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. It dawned on me while attending the ATS&E that a worry over the supposed lack of global volunteerism is not something that keeps me awake at night. In fact, SPE’s volunteer culture helps me to sleep at night. Over these past 5 years, I have served on SPE’s international board first in the capacity of Canadian regional director and now as 2018 president. I cannot recount the number of vigorous (not necessarily rigorous) discussions over the state of volunteerism, mostly in the negative. The narrative often goes like this: The _____ conference has been going for 10 years (or 20, or 30), and this same group of volunteers has run it. Now that they are all retiring or moving away, there is no way this conference can continue. Or: With the reduction in regional directors and/or SPE staff, there is no way this event can continue. The new generation just does not understand volunteerism. And the best one of all (one that I am guilty of saying): With the spreading of SPE to all parts of the globe where national companies dominate, how are we ever going to have volunteer events? All I can say is wrong, wrong, and wrong. I can clearly say that volunteerism is alive and well everywhere in the SPE world. Today’s youth—both professionals and students—embrace volunteering, but they make it their own. It may not be the way we in the older generations define volunteering; however, not only does it work, but their methods also succeed. Let me give some examples.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.270 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Petroleum TechnologySame topicNursing Education, Practice, and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207