Terms of Reference The New Researcher Award is presented annually
Bibliographic record
Abstract
to a member of the Division of Science faculty community in recognition of outstanding contributions to scientific knowledge in their area of expertise based on work undertaken while employed at the university. Eligibility Open to all faculty members in the Division of Science who at the time of nomination:- Received their Ph.D. less than 10 years ago- Have not been previously recognized by a similar or higher award at the University of Saskatchewan (e.g. University New Researcher Award). Selection Criteria The Selection Committee will consider the integrated contributions from a body of work or a singular but significant breakthrough in an individual’s research area. Selection Committee The award recipient shall be chosen by a Selection Committee that is chaired by the Vice Dean Science and includes one faculty member from each of the six Departments within the Division. Nomination Procedures Each year, the Vice Dean Science will be responsible for issuing a call for nominations. Candidates will be nominated by two colleagues at the University of Saskatchewan. The nomination package must include: 1. A letter from the two nominators summarizing the candidate’s research achievements and outlining the national or international significance of the candidate’s scholarly work. (The nomination letter should not exceed three pages).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.607 | 0.614 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier 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".