Bibliographic record
Abstract
After New Brunswick’s 2010 provincial election, a new policy environment took shape, characterized by an awareness of, among other things, ballooning public debt, economic dysfunction, soaring health costs, and demographic decline. Employing institutionalist analysis, this essay canvasses these problems and examines the obstacles standing in the way of effective, concerted action to deal with them. New Brunswick manifests several factors making institutional change to address these policy challenges difficult. Resume Apres les elections du Nouveau-Brunswick de 2010, un nouvel environnement politique a pris forme. Cet environnement a ete caracterise par une prise de conscience, entres autres, d’une dette publique astronomique, d’une economie dysfonctionnelle, de couts de soins de sante qui montent en fleche et d’un declin de la demographie. En s’appuyant sur une analyse institutionnaliste, cet article sonde ces problemes et examine les obstacles qui freinent les actions efficaces et concertees necessaires afin de les surmonter. Le Nouveau-Brunswick presente plusieurs facteurs qui contribuent aux changements institutionnels afin de traiter de ces defis politiques difficiles.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".