MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1575827008

The Regulation of Known Unknowns: Toward Good Regulatory Governance Principles

2009· article· en· W1575827008 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert Slater

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceChecklistPreparednessDomain (mathematical analysis)BusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Political scienceManagement scienceOperations researchEconomicsEngineeringFinancePsychologyLawMathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I will start this exploration by first discussing a well­studied example: the results of the Krever inquiry on the blood system in Canada. I will then compare this case to three current and pertinent cases on the regulation of known unknowns: the financial system, biofuels and nanotechnology. I conclude with a list of good governance principles that, I believe, represent a useful checklist and discussion starter. My goal is to go beyond the spontaneous reaction one might have when faced with scarce data: to demand more research, data and knowledge. Instead, I want to explore the full range of options in the domain of regulatory governance and preparedness.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score0.492

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207