MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1570664329 · doi:10.4324/9781315557854-21

The Muskoka Accountability Report: Assessing the Written Record

2010· article· en· W1570664329 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ella Kokotsis

Bibliographic record

VenueВестник международных организаций · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccountabilitySummitPolitical scienceCompliance (psychology)Public administrationPublic relationsLawPsychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ella Kokotsis, Ph.D, Director of Accountability, G8 and G20 Research Groups, Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto; E-mail: ella.kokotsis@ieso.ca The article presents the analysis of the assessment the compliance of the G8 summit commitments and the importance of the released first full and comprehensive G8 Accountability Report in Muskoka. The author focuses the attention on the questions how 2010 Muskoka Accountability Report came to be, and how the report fared in its delivery through the Report overview, its strengths and limitations. Moreover, the author proposes the recommendations for future G8 reporting.

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)0.118
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.359
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.624

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1180.359
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0120.009
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.345 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueВестник международных организацийSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207