MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W310991897

The Canadian Forces Officer Selection System

2000· article· en· W310991897 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDefense Technical Information Center (DTIC) · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Education and Admissions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOfficerSelection (genetic algorithm)Personnel selectionCrewOperations researchProcess (computing)AptitudeOperations managementEngineeringComputer scienceAeronauticsManagementPsychologyPolitical scienceArtificial intelligenceLawEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides a brief overview of the officer selection process for the Canadian Forces. The current size of the Canadian Forces and officer applicant and enrollee statistics for the main enrollment plans are included. The applicant processing sequence is described in general. Applicant attributes assessed in the selection interview and areas used to assign a specific occupation are discussed. Specific selection instruments, including aptitude testing, medical evaluation, the selection interview and fitness testing are described, and the use of these sources of information in the decision process is reviewed. Finally, the Naval Officer Assessment Board and the Air Crew selection procedures are described.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.261 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDefense Technical Information Center (DTIC)Same topicMedical Education and AdmissionsFrench-language works237,207