MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6891719329 · doi:10.4224/21277154

Audit of the Industrial Research Assistance Program in the interim operating environment: June 2015

2015· report· en· W6891719329 on OpenAlexafffundabout

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResearch, Science, and Academia
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsInterimAuditFiscal yearAudit planInformation technology auditJoint auditInternal auditFinancial Audit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This audit report presents the findings of the National Research Council Canada’s (NRC) Audit of the Industrial Research Assistance Program (IRAP) in the Interim Operating Environment (IOE). The objective of the audit was to provide just-in-time independent assurance to NRC Senior Management that controls remained effective in the Interim Operating Environment (IOE) to allow NRC to make necessary corrections before fiscal year-end.

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)0.143
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Open science, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1430.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0090.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.660
GPT teacher head0.576
Teacher spread0.084 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicResearch, Science, and AcademiaFrench-language works237,207