Bibliographic record
Abstract
"As Canadians, we are all touched by some aspect of social welfare, either as recipients, donors, or taxpayers. But despite the importance of the social network in our country, there has been no single source of information about this critical component of our society. Even professionals in the field of social work or social services have not had a comprehensive volume addressing the myriad features of this critical societal structure. The Encyclopedia of Canadian Social Work fills this need." "Over five hundred topics important to Canadian social work are covered, written by a highly diverse group of social workers representing all aspects of the field and all areas of the country. Practitioners, policy makers, academics, social advocates, researchers, students, and administrators present a rich overview of the complexity and diversity of social work and social welfare as it exists in Canada." "The principal finding from this project upholds the long-held perception that there is a uniquely Canadian model of social work that stands as a useful model for other countries. The Encyclopedia of Canadian Social Work is an important source of information for both Canadians and interested groups around the world."--BOOK JACKET.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.025 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.256 | 0.146 |
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".