The management and administration of government communications in <scp>C</scp>anada
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article examines the communications function in C anadian government using the results of a pilot study on the governments of C anada, O ntario and the City of T oronto. It first defines what government communication is, explains what activities are included within the function, and then explains how and for what purposes government communications are used. It also provides a high‐level overview of how communications within the federal, provincial and municipal governments are managed and administered. The article concludes with some observations about the nature of government communications in C anada and thoughts about future research in the area. Sommaire Cet article examine la fonction de communication au sein du gouvernement canadien en se fondant sur les résultats d'une étude pilote sur les gouvernements du C anada, de l’ O ntario et de la V ille de T oronto. Il définit tout d'abord en quoi consiste la communication gouvernementale, démontre quelles sont les activités que comporte cette fonction, puis explique comment est utilisée la communication gouvernementale et à quelles fins. L'article offre également un aperçu de haut niveau sur la manière dont on gère et administre les communications au sein du gouvernement fédéral et des gouvernements provinciaux et municipaux. En conclusion, l'article présente certaines observations sur la nature de la communication gouvernementale au C anada et des suggestions de recherche future dans le domaine.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it