MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7020843973

Morgantown MSA Economic Monitor March 2006

2006· article· en· W7020843973 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueThe Research Repository @ WVU (West Virginia University) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Issues and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)West virginiaMetropolitan areaIndex (typography)Cost of livingPhoneSquare (algebra)Consumer price index (South Africa)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to the ACCRA Cost of Living Index 1 , in the fourth quarter of 2006, Morgantown was not only a cheap place to buy ingredients for a filling home-cooked breakfast but also had a cost of living for professional households that was average for an urbanized area in the United States.Table 1 contains summary data on the cost of living for Morgantown and other metropolitan areas.Morgantown's average fourth quarter index was driven by above average prices for utilities and healthcare items and well below average prices for miscellaneous goods/services, as shown in Table 1.Utilities, which include natural gas and electric costs for a 2,400 square foot home as well as local phone service, for Morgantown were 12.2 percent above the average.Health care costs in the area were 6.5 percent above the national average due to significantly high dental care costs.The cost for miscellaneous goods and services, which includes 19 items, in Morgantown, was the 41st cheapest.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.298 · 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