MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7037011030

Department of Energy: Contractor Litigation Costs

2002· article· en· W7037011030 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsLiabilityFiscal yearQuarter (Canadian coin)Personal injuryLiability insurancePayment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Correspondence issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "Under the Federal Acquisition Regulation and the Department of Energy's (DOE) acquisition regulations, DOE can reimburse its contractors for reasonable legal costs associated with cases brought against them in such matters as equal opportunity employment, radiation and toxic exposure, personal injury, and wrongful discharge. Such costs are not reimbursable if there is liability related to the contractor's willful misconduct, lack of good faith, or failure to exercise prudent business judgment. In practice, DOE reimburses its contractors for most of the legal costs. From fiscal year 1995 through the third quarter of fiscal year 2001, there have been more than 2,100 cases and DOE has reimbursed its contractors more than $290 million for associated litigation and disposition costs. The contractors have spent $13 million in their defense. In the same time period, there have been nearly 400 equal employment opportunity cases for which DOE reimbursed its contractors $53 million. The contractors spent $2 million."

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
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 score0.239
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0090.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2390.106

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas)Same topicPosthumanist Ethics and ActivismFrench-language works237,207