Bibliographic record
Abstract
We are pleased to present to practitioners, supervisors, quality assurance personnel, and researchers this User’s Manual for the 2010 version of the Second Canadian Adaptation of the Assessment and Action Record from Looking After Children (AAR-C2-2010; Flynn, Miller, Desjardins, Ghazal, & Legault, 2010). Our designation of the tool as the AAR-C2-2010 throughout the manual serves to distinguish it from its predecessor, the AAR-C2-2006. The manual is intended as a guide and reference tool for direct service, supervisory, and quality-assurance personnel. It will facilitate the analysis, interpretation, and presentation of OnLAC data at the individual, organizational, and provincial levels. The manual presupposes familiarity with the AAR-C2-2010 itself, gained through training in the Ontario Looking after Children curriculum as well as experience in administering or interpreting the instrument.
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 | 0.015 | 0.111 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.526 | 0.440 |
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".