MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1535889184 · doi:10.1111/ropr.12113

Assessing Intergovernmental Institutions and Transnational Policy Networks in North American Resource Management: Concluding Remarks

2015· article· en· W1535889184 on OpenAlex
Andrea Olive

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Policy Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceRegional scienceEnvironmental resource managementPublic administrationBusinessEnvironmental planningGeographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract What is the role of intergovernmental institutions and transnational policy networks in the management of North American natural resources? The articles presented in this special volume provide some answers to this question and contribute to an ongoing discussion about bilateral and trilateral resource management. This concluding article pulls together the major themes, questions, answers, and avenues for further research presented in the special volume. There is broad consensus that post‐bureaucratic interactive agencies are developing in bi‐ and trilateral resource management but notable policy outcomes are lagging. Climate change is hypothesized to be a test of Northern American governance because already we see this formidable issue further cementing fragmented bilateralism.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.338 · 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