Survey on early career travel support shows geographic, career stage, and indigenous status inequality in access to polar science events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The Association of Polar Early Career Scientists is an international organization with membership representing 70 countries. Members are mostly graduate students and post-docs, though 29% are early career professionals in other polar-related career tracks. A survey was sent in summer 2019 to APECS members and polar science community members asking about travel support needs and how respondents’ recent travel was funded. Participants described the perceived availability of different types and sources of travel funding. Availability of travel awards and the expectation that early career researchers would pay for their meeting-related travel out of personal funds varies widely between countries, career stage and indigenous status. Substantially higher travel support is often needed to support participants from countries outside the US, Canada, and Northern Europe because of both the higher cost of traveling to typical meeting destinations coupled with lower availability of supplemental or full travel support. This presentation will cover the international patterns in early career travel funding, the utility of travel advances and the importance of making funding decisions eaerly enough for ECRs as a way to promote diversity in polar sciences.</p>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".