Preface to the First Edition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this book, the first of its kind, the contributors illustrate the broad scope of the child and youth care field in Canada and note some of the similarities, differences, and critical issues within selected practice areas.Where the field was once primarily defined within the context of residential care and child day care, it is now seen in Canada from a wider perspective, as will be outlined in the subsequent chapters.However broad the child and youth care field might be it is the essence of practice, with its unique blend of caring and professionalism, that binds it together.We also identify some of the key persons and programs upon which the child and youth care field is built.In acknowledging the history of the child and youth care field, as well as its current state, it is our intention for the text to serve as a transition to the future.The future embodies change that can, in turn, be viewed as creating either threat or opportunity.It is hoped that this text will be useful in facilitating adaption within the field, so that the future of child and youth care across the country will continue to be filled with opportunity.This book represents the joint efforts of many contributors; we believe this is one of its greatest assets.We have thoroughly enjoyed the collaboration with our colleagues from across the country in producing this book and we would like to offer it as a tribute to the Canadian child and youth care field.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.321 | 0.169 |
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".