MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989117095

Academic Health Center Improvement Suggestions/Faculty Consultative Committee, 1999

2009· other· en· W6989117095 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (University of Minnesota) · 2009
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT-based Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institutes of HealthMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Minnesota
KeywordsClass (philosophy)LegislatureTable (database)Center (category theory)Front (military)Distribution (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My initial reaction and suggestions are to first strengthen communication with the present research, teaching and patient care members of the ARC.We have a number of internal problems that severely limit what we can accomplish.I can only speak of personal experience.Here is one example.The absence of distribution of any indirect funds to the faculty that generate them is a problem that creates investigator hostility.For example, I have tried-for two years to have walls painted in three room of my laboratory.A round table of researcher participants to discuss indirect fund distribution would be useful.Talking directly to faculty at open forums might uncover many of these problems and create an environment that we can build upon to accomplish the world class goals.With this more united front we can better engage the legislature and people of the state.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.201 · 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