MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100983406

The Executive Director of Municipal Licensing and Standards recommends that

2010· article· en· W7100983406 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducation, Healthcare and Sociology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoticeCLARITYPoint (geometry)Unintended consequencesCode of practiceCode (set theory)Inspector generalLegislation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Number: P:\\2010\\Cluster B\\MLS\\Ls10018 SUMMARY This report is a staff initiated report arising from: (a) an unintended amendment to the City’s licensing thresholds when the criminal code offence sections were clarified; and (b) a lack of clarity on what constitutes a demerit point with respect to the licensing thresholds. The errors, because they have not been reflected in the Licensing System, have not had an impact on licence issuing, renewals or hearings. The proposed changes in this report address the issues to bring the bylaw back in line with practice. The City Solicitor was consulted in the preparation of this report. Public notice has been given in a manner prescribed in the Toronto Municipal Code

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2470.124

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.394 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducation, Healthcare and Sociology ResearchFrench-language works237,207