MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110514227 · doi:10.1021/acscentsci.0c01120

Twelve Principles Trainees, PIs, Departments, and Faculties Can Use to Reduce Bias and Discrimination in STEM

2020· article· en· W3110514227 on OpenAlex
Lisa M. Willis, Devang Mehta, Alexandra Davis

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Central Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousSet (abstract data type)ImmigrationPsychologyFace (sociological concept)Representation (politics)Cultural biasSocial psychologySociologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceComputer scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence demonstrating that people from marginalized groups, including women, racialized and Indigenous peoples, people with disabilities, immigrants, and LGBTQ+ individuals, continue to face substantial discrimination in STEM, manifested as both overt bias and unconscious bias. These biases result in discrimination against individuals in marginalized groups, and independent biases collectively contribute to a culture that systematically discriminates against people from marginalized groups. Representation from marginalized groups in postsecondary degrees in natural science and engineering has not substantially improved in over a decade. A set of 10 concrete principles are presented that trainees, principle investigators, departments, and faculties can use to enhance the participation and lived experiences of people in marginalized groups in STEM.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.132 · 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