MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7028901957

Honor & respect the official guide to names, titles, and forms of address

2023· article· en· W7028901957 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHonorFormalityDecorumState (computer science)Government (linguistics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Honor and Respect is the definitive guide to first impressions. For any personal or professional situation where formality is of the essence and proper decorum is the expectation, this book offers critical information on how to address, introduce, and communicate with officials, functionaries, and dignitaries from all walks of life and over 180 countries. From presidents to pastors, ambassadors to attorneys general to your local alderperson, Honor and Respect offers clear explanations and examples of the official honorifics of thousands of federal, state, and municipal officials; corporate executives; clergy; tribal officials; and members of the armed services in the United States, Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. It also includes titles and guidance on addressing high officials from more than 180 countries. Painstakingly researched and carefully vetted, the book's contents are indispensable for individuals or offices working in government, foreign affairs, diplomacy, law, the military, training and consulting, and public relations, among others. This updated third edition reflects the nuanced changes in language, protocol, and conventions that have been implemented by the State Department, Armed Forces, and myriad other government offices in the US and beyond"--

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2030.182

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.358 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research→French-language works237,207→