MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099488170

Community Partners:

2003· article· en· W7099488170 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Physics and Python Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlueprintGeneral partnershipBest practiceAction (physics)Process (computing)Strategic planningAction planStrategic partnership
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Priorities for Action serves as a provincial blueprint to complement, guide and support community and health authority efforts to manage the HIV/AIDS epidemic in British Columbia. This directional document will assist partners at all levels in the province in targeting HIV/AIDS program priorities over the next five years to achieve the best outcomes possible. A draft of Priorities for Action was presented at workshops held during March and April 2003 in partnership with Health Canada and each of British Columbia's six health authorities. Comment and feedback from health authority staff and community partners helped to shape the document’s subsequent revision. As the process for developing a provincial direction initially began, I committed to the creation of a document that focuses on actions driven by the best evidence from around the world. Priorities for Action incorporates lessons learned from many international jurisdictions, including those that have addressed HIV/AIDS with great success in resource-constrained environments. These experiences, as well as BC’s own successes, enable us to better focus our discussion and efforts within the HIV/AIDS sector to ensure the maximum effect in reducing the rate of new infections, improving treatment and services and ensuring a co-ordinated and collaborative approach among the many stakeholders involved in managing the HIV/AIDS epidemic. You will see these principles and best practices reflected in Priorities for Action, as well as targets we believe are achievable with concerted partnerships and strategic reallocation of resources.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.268 · 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