Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many individuals and organizations contributed to the successful completion of this Court Executive Development Program research project. Notable among those supporting research on succession planning in the courts are Hon. Edward R. Post, Chief Judge of the 20 th Circuit Court; Hon. Mark A. Feyen, Chief Judge of the Ottawa County Probate Court; and members of the Courts ’ Leadership Team, Sandi Metcalf, Kelly Aylsworth, Jennell Challa and Penni DeWitt. Special thanks are also due the State Justice Institute, which provided essential financial support in the form of scholarships and grants. Without this SJI support, trial courts would not have the benefit of this important research on employee development. As with any type of research project, data collection can be troublesome without willing research participants. In this effort, all judges of the 20 th Circuit and Ottawa County Probate Courts participated, as well as supervisors and members of the Strategic Planning Oversight Team. Beyond the subject courts, several members of the Michigan Association of Circuit Court Administrators devoted time to complete survey questions and provide helpful suggestions and select Ottawa County Officials assisted with personal interviews. Specifically, the interviewees were County Administrator, Alan G. Vanderberg; Human Resources Director Marie Waalkes
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.096 | 0.094 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".