MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7038078717

Financial Management: Promptness of FY 2002 Third Quarter DoD Payments to the Department of the Treasury for District of Columbia Water and Sewer Services

2002· article· en· W7038078717 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDefense Technical Information Center (DTIC) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLogistics and Transportation Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTreasuryPaymentQuarter (Canadian coin)Capital (architecture)RevenueAgency (philosophy)Water supplyAdministration (probate law)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The audit was conducted in response to Public Law 106-554, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2001, The Act requires the inspector general of each Federal agency that receives water and sewer services from the District of Columbia to report to the Congressional Appropriations Committees on the promptness of payments within 15 days of the start of each quarter. The District of Columbia Water and Sewer Authority supplies both water and sewer services to Federal agencies and DoD Components within the National Capital Region. The Department of the Treasury is the collection agent for Federal agencies and DoD Components' water and sewer payments, with the Department of the Treasury submitting a single payment to the Water and Sewer Authority. The DoD Components, composed of 16 separate installations, sites, and organizations, are required to make advance quarterly payments to the Department of the Treasury for estimated bills on anticipated water usage in FY 2003. If the estimated bill is more than actual usage, the DoD Components receive a credit 3 years after the payment, the time it takes for billing reconciliation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
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 score0.540
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.004

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 venueDefense Technical Information Center (DTIC)Same topicLogistics and Transportation SystemsFrench-language works237,207