Bibliographic record
Abstract
1500 individuals from120 counties participated in the nominations and rankings process Think tanks were nominated and then ranked in 29 categories Total number of think tanks nominated 5491 Total number of nominations for all 29 categories 17,971 75 think tanks nominated for the top think in the world We are constantly trying to improve the quality of our data on think tanks so that critical changes in countries and regions are reflected in our research.This year we conducted a comprehensive assessment of the nominations and rankings process and launched an intensive outreach effort to increase the rigor and reach of the Global Go To Think Tank Rankings.We are always looking for ways to enhance the process so I welcome your comments and suggestions on how we might improve the nomination and rankings.We also welcome the names and contact information for prospective Expert Panel members for the functional and geographic regions cover by the rankings. Top Think Tanks by Region-Top Think Tanks in the United States -Top Think Tanks in Latin America and the Caribbean -Top Think Tanks in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) -Top Think Tanks in Sub-Saharan Africa -Top Think Tanks in Western Europe -Top Think Tanks in Central and Eastern Europe -Top Think Tanks in Asia 3. Top Think Tanks by Research Area -Top International Development Think Tanks -Top Health Policy Think Tanks -Top Environment Think Tanks -Top Security and International Affairs Think Tanks -Top Domestic Economic Policy Think Tanks -Top International Economic Policy Think Tanks -Top Social Policy Think Tanks -Top Science and Technology Think Tanks -Top Transparency and Good Governance Think Tanks 4. Top Think Tanks by Special Achievement -Think Tanks with the Most Innovative Policy Ideas/Proposals -Best New Think Tanks (established in the last 18 months) -Outstanding Policy-Oriented Public Policy Research Program -Best Use of the Internet to Engage the Public -Best Use of the Media (Print or Electronic) to Communicate Programs and Research -Best External Relations/Public Engagement Program -Greatest Impact on Public Policy -Best University Affiliated Think Tanks -Best Government Affiliated Think Tanks -Best Party Affiliated Think Tanks
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 | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.104 | 0.118 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".