University of Manitoba NSERC Discovery Portfolio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Discovery Grants information centre: this page on NSERC’s website contains a wealth of resources related to the DG competition, including videos, the Peer Review Manual, and a Discovery Grants FAQ. NSERC has recently conducted an extensive consultation on the RTI program and has introduced a quota system to limit the number of applications an institution may submit to this competition. The quota is based on the number of NSERC-funded researchers in the natural sciences and engineering at the institution (the University of Manitoba’s quota for 2013-2014 is 12 RTI applications). To ensure the University maximizes the opportunity to submit its full quota of applications to this competition, an internal review process has been established. Please contact ORS if you need more information regarding the RTI quota. Research Tools & Instruments (RTI) Grants are submitted through the NSERC Online site for the 2013-2014 competition, using the traditional Form 100 (not the NSERC CCV yet). Full proposal due at ORS……………………………… … 15 August 2013 Full proposal due at ORS (Sub-Atomic Physics only) 11 October 2013 Full proposal due at NSERC……………………..………. 25 October 2013P a g e | 2
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".