Budgeting Committee minutes for December 3, 2007
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DiscussionsSteve Stratton welcomed everyone.The budget managers gave their 1 st Quarter reviews.Melissa started the presentation and spoke on behalf of the Office of the President.Their division is right on target.Missy spoke for Finance and Administration and that division is on target with 25% spent for the first quarter.The $200Kcarry forward for them went to public safety, Chaparral Hall, Aliso Hall and for Malibu Hall power upgrades.Judy spoke on behalf if Information Technology and they are 22% spent, however they spent a lot in October and the phone charges will hit in November.Ed spoke for Student Affairs and they are at about 17% spent.He stated that the shortfall is mainly due to 4 key positions that are still vacant but they have hired temps to keep up on the work.As for their $313K carry forward, they are taking requests from their departments to distribute.Kris gave the presentation for Academic Affairs.She provided a handout and stated they have savings in salaries and benefits.Missy gave the presentation of the budget book and explained the contents.Therese talked about the UPACC
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.018 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".