MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3099942884 · doi:10.11575/cpai.v3i1.69811

Applying a Holistic Approach to Contract Cheating: A Canadian Response

2020· article· en· W3099942884 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emma J. Thacker, Angela Clark, Andrea Ridgley

Bibliographic record

VenueSOURCE Sheridan's Institutional Repository (Sheridan College) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAcademic integrity and plagiarism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCheatingAction planAction (physics)Perspective (graphical)Plan (archaeology)Academic integrityPublic relationsPolitical scienceBusinessEngineering ethicsManagementComputer scienceEngineeringPsychologyEconomicsSocial psychologyGeographyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper traces the development of a contract cheating action plan, introduced by the Academic Integrity Council of Ontario (AICO), Canada. The action plan offers a holistic response to contract cheating, involving multiple and diverse stakeholders from postsecondary education. Created by an AICO subcommittee, three of its founding members detail the action plan and provide a perspective on its strengths, challenges, and ongoing implementation.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.236 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSOURCE Sheridan's Institutional Repository (Sheridan College)Same topicAcademic integrity and plagiarismFrench-language works237,207