MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990254740

A definição de trabalho social da FITS: Por que revisar?

2011· article· pt· W6990254740 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Scientific Electronic Library Online (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo) · 2011
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Political Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Social assistanceSocial lifeSocial needs
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O texto que segue trata do debate brasileiro sobre a definição de Serviço Social aprovada pela Federação Internacional de Trabalhadores Sociais - Fits na assembleia de Montreal, Canadá, no ano 2000. Na assembleia de Hong Kong, em 2010, a proposta de realização de um workshop no Brasil sobre o tema foi aprovada como estratégia da contribuição latino-americana no processo de sua revisão Este tema será discutido na próxima assembleia da Fits em Estocolmo, de 8 a 12 de julho de 2012.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Scientific Electronic Library Online (Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo)Same topicSocial and Political IssuesFrench-language works237,207