MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176753189

Writing Curriculum Vitae (CV) and Referee Reports

2015· article· en· W3176753189 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jacinta Ezeyi

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumLibrary sciencePolitical scienceHumanitiesPedagogyPsychologyArtComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The term Curriculum Vitae (CV) is a Latin expression which literally translates to course of one's life. It is used to refer to an outline of someone's educational and professional history, prepared and submitted (particularly but not only) for employment purpose (job application). Another name often given to CV is resume. However, in countries like Canada (particularly in Quebec) and USA, a distinction is made between the two terms (CV and resume). The CV is most often used for academic positions and is conceived to be longer than the resume, as it includes information on publications, conferences attended by the candidate and the like. A resume, on the other hand, is conceived to be shorter and to exclusively contain information that may be relevant to a particular position. The resume's content needs to capture a number of key areas including (i) a personal profile statement, (ii) role undertaken, (iii) skills and abilities, (iv) educational qualification and ongoing personal development and (v) hobbies and interest (Brisk 2011: 6; O'Brien 2000: 123). In this chapter, we shall use CV as a general term.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.270
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.270
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0140.012
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2110.161

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207