MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7073757952

CareerAdvance® Implementation Study Findings Through July 2013

2015· other· en· W7073757952 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueTexas ScholarWorks (Texas Digital Library) · 2015
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityNorthwestern University
KeywordsProgram evaluationAction (physics)CohortProgram Design LanguageData collectionKey (lock)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report examines changes in the CareerAdvance® program that directly relate to the experience and progress of participants through July 2014—the end of the fifth program year— and the recruitment of Cohort 10 in spring 2014. A key finding of the implementation study to date is that the Community Action Project of Tulsa County (CAP Tulsa) has approached the design of the CareerAdvance® program as a continuous improvement process. The program model, its pathways, and other components have all been refined over time to address participant concerns, barriers to progress, and other factors. Because of these changes, few cohorts have experienced exactly the same program. This report examines program modifications over time, documents participation and progress in CareerAdvance®, and explores factors that appear to impede or support participant progress.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.014

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.228 · 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