Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the past three months, three members of the Board of Directors of Assisted Human Reproduction Canada (AHRC) have resigned. Their resignation letters include the following statements: '[that following requests for information about the Agency's spending and budget] there was much reluctance and procrastination in providing information, and that when the information was provided, there were inconsistencies in what I received and what was originally presented. This raises concerns in my mind about the prudence and diligence in managing public funds'; 'I have encountered difficulties as a board member in receiving satisfactory replies to concerns and questions I have raised which recently included audits and contracts. What I have been witness to is a resistance to give full and straightforward answers when questions and requests for clarification were made'; and 'I am unable to fulfill the duties entrusted to me in a manner that satisfies my conscience and my integrity.'\nThis set of resignations is cause for serious concern and requires urgent attention from the federal Parliamentary Standing Committee on Health and Parliament itself.
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 | 0.009 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.024 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.009 |
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".