MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1648694084 · doi:10.15353/joci.v8i2.3038

“This is what modern deregulation looks like” : co-optation and contestation in the shaping of the UK’s Open Government Data Initiative

2012· article· en· W1648694084 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Community Informatics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAusterityGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsDeregulationCivil societyPublic administrationContext (archaeology)Political scienceOpen governmentCoalition governmentConservative governmentSociologyLawOpen dataEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article argues, drawing on interviews, event observations, academic and policy literature, that the UK’s Open Government Data (OGD) initiative should be understood as part of a deep seated social and political struggle with significant processes of co-optation and contestation over outcomes underway. The OGD initiative’s intersections with both the PSI re-use industry and the UK government’s programme of forced ‘austerity’ and marketisation of public services are problematised. Civil society advocates’ vulnerabilities within this context are discussed and a number of recommendations are offered for the progressive shaping of OGD based on egalitarian principles.

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)0.011
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.359
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.102 · 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