Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of the conditions of funding the statewide Alaska FAS Prevention Project, SAMHSA requested that the project be evaluated by an independent team of evaluators. This evaluation contract was awarded to the Center for Human Development (CHD) at the University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA), with the request that the evaluation be conducted by an interdisciplinary team of evaluators from across the UAA campus. Staff at CHD subsequently selected various professionals from the UAA community to build the Evaluation Team and to divide the work involved in the evaluation of the FAS Prevention Project. The FAS Project Principal Evaluation Team selection began in February 2001 (3rd Quarter of FY 01 of the grant). In August 2001, a comprehensive evaluation plan was submitted to the FAS Advisory Team and State Office of FAS for review and approval. Following submittal of the evaluation plan application to the University of Alaska Institutional Review Board (IRB) and receipt of funding from the state in August 2001, the detailed actions defined in the Diagnostic Evaluation Plan were initiated in October 2001 (2nd Quarter of FY 02 of the grant). The Alaska Comprehensive and Specialized Evaluation Services (ACSES) was one of the groups approached by CHD to participate as a member of the FAS Project Principal Evaluation Team. ACSES was honored to take on the evaluation of diagnosis-related activities, committing to activities to meet five large goals. One of these goals was the review of FAS diagnostic methods that have been used in Alaska and across the United States. This report provides an update on activities and findings about this goal to date.
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 | 0.109 | 0.418 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.036 | 0.022 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.014 |
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".