[CUE Communications committee records]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
File contains newsletters of Canadian University Employees (formerly Local 1 of AUCE), a CUPE-CUE Report on the first year of affiliation, carbon copy of a list of CUE officers submitted to CUPE, a January 30, 1986 membership meeting bulletin, hand-written notes regarding the presence of U.S. efficiency analysis firm Ritchie and Associates, and a bulletin regarding Ritchie and Associates' Final Report on Financial Services. On Cue, Summer 1986 newsletter includes a CUE representatives directory, Grievance Committee report, Health and Safety Report, two reports on the CUPE BC 23rd Annual Convention, reprinted article from the Canadian Labour Congress on free trade, information on contractual obligations for medical leave, report and open letter on campus daycare, an update on activity and presence of Ritchie and Associates, a report on St. Paul Hospital's negotiations, and a letter to the editor regarding leadership of the Social Credit party. [May 1986] newsletter includes a Contract Committee report, Grievance Committee report, CUE for Safety report, a report on the risks of video display terminals, a Union Office report, a report on the benefits of CUPE affiliation, letters to 'Your Cue' (Editor's Corner) from Local 1 members, correspondence opposing Ritchie and Associates, an article in solidarity of the Hospital Employees Union, information on South African apartheid, statement requesting support of child care, and a "Name the Newsletter Contest" ballot. CUE's News, February 1986 newsletter includes a statement on office restructuring, update on wage increment implementation at UBC, Grievance Committee report, October 1985 CUPE National Convention report, Contract Committee report, letter of thanks from the Daycare Council, Job Evaluation Committee report, reprint of Current Disputes, and correspondence regarding the Pacific Western Airline dispute.
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 | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.763 | 0.709 |
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".