MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246351703 · doi:10.4324/9780203078761-14

Delegation: Burden or empowerment?

2013· book-chapter· en· W4246351703 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation 3-13 · 2013
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Peace and Security Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelegationEmpowermentBusinessPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stereotypical image of the scientist is a balding, middle-aged man in a white coat surrounded by bunsen burners or doing unspeakable things to rats. Chambers1 demonstrated that among Canadian children this stereotype can develop very early. In his study children as young as seven drew pictures displaying many of the ‘indicators’ of the standard image of the scientist including lab coat, spectacles, facial hair and/or baldness, symbols of research and knowledge and so on. Hadden and Johnstone2 also found that primary school children (in this case in Scotland) had well developed ideas about scientists, including the idea that scientists are men. Among several hundred children questioned, not one described a scientist as female. Such strongly held ideas about appropriate gender roles may be expected to subvert attempts to encourage females to take up science as a career, or to study it at an advanced level in school. The aim of this study was to assess current ideas about scientists among Scottish primary school children.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.005

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.290 · 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