National Research Council Canada: 2011-12 to 2013-14 risk-based internal audit plan: internal audit: NRC April 2011-summary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chart below depicts those audits that will commence or will be completed in 2011-12; others will be completed in the following year as indicated in Section 3.5. There are four audits which have not yet been completed by the end of 2010-11 that are planned to be presented to the Audit Committee in the first half of the fiscal year, i.e., the audits of the Financial Management Control Framework (Budgeting, Revenue and EDP Purchases), Human Resources Planning, Follow-up to the 2007-08 Audit of the Management of IT Security and the Follow-up to the Audit of the Industrial Research Assistance Program. Continuous audit testing for Canada Economic Action Plan funds received in 2009-10 and 2010-11 (Industrial Research Assistance Program, Modernizing Federal Laboratories and Federal Contaminated Sites Assistance Program) will be completed. Continuous audits of these areas and others were introduced in 2009-10 as a means for ensuring audit results obtained in previous years remain relevant for the purposes of supporting the Chief Audit Executive’s annual assurance reporting on the adequacy and effectiveness of NRC’s risk management, control and governance processes. While audits have been conducted since 2006-07 in all three tiers of NRC’s audit universe, relatively smaller coverage has been provided to date in the Scientific and Innovation Activities portion. These audits that were to have commenced 2011-12 are on hold pending the further development and refinement of NRC’s new Strategy as well as confirmation that funding for the Technology Clusters will continue beyond 2011-12.
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 | 0.030 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.071 | 0.067 |
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".