MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Jumpstarting STEM Careers

2013· article· en· W4206956697 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karen L. Sweazea, D. Page Baluch, Kirstin Traynor, Arianne Cease, Margaret Coulombe, Valerie Stout

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCareer Development and Diversity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationWomen in scienceCareer developmentGraduate studentsUnderrepresented MinorityPsychologyLibrary scienceMedicineSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A successful career in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) requires great education and research experiences as well as extensive training and preparation with dedicated mentors. Recent statistics show women received over 40% of all BA/BS degrees awarded by U.S. 4‐year colleges and universities in the life sciences and the proportion of women with doctorates has exceeded 40–60% in some fields. However, the proportion of women associate professors in the basic science departments of most universities is still below 30%, and the proportion with rank of full professor is only 20%. Therefore, the Central Arizona Chapter of the Association for Women in Science at ASU, in collaboration with colleagues from George Washington, Gallaudet and Ottawa Universities, has developed a program to help prepare graduate students, post docs and early faculty for careers in STEM. This NSF advance funded program tackles the problem of low career advancement of women and minorities by hosting career development seminars and workshops to provide training, mentoring and networking opportunities for graduate students and post docs. Such career training programs will help address the complex problem encountered by women and minorities and thus will aid in restoring a pipeline of diverse STEM professionals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.248
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicCareer Development and DiversityFrench-language works237,207