“A circle of care”: Building community together in Guelph-Wellington
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Every day the Community Engaged Scholarship Institute (CESI) has the privilege of partnering with a number of individuals and organizations who work tirelessly towards a more just, inclusive, and caring community. Their vision is bold and fierce, their passion is contagious, and their commitment to social change is driving tangible transformation. Together, they make Guelph and Wellington a better place to live for all. \n \nThis exhibit seeks to amplify and celebrate the work of a few of those leading community organizations and key CESI partners. Each of them generously shared with us their vision for the future, their key priorities, their successes, and the challenges that they are striving to overcome. These posters are an invitation to learn more about their contexts and contributions, and a call to take action and join us in creating change in Guelph-Wellington.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.021 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.003 |
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".