MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1685918278

발달장애아를 위한 정책 발전 과정에 관한 분석적 고찰- 캐나다의 온타리오 주를 중심으로 -

2002· article· ko· W1685918278 on OpenAlex
서화자

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

Venue한국영유아보육학 · 2002
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, Safety, and Science Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionalisationNormalization (sociology)Political scienceConvictionPolicy developmentPublic administrationSociologyLawSocial science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Governments of the Provinces and the Territories in Canada have pursued the policy of de-institutionalization for developmental disabilities based on the concept of normalization. This kind of policy has to be followed by the service programs which may facilitate developmental disabilities to an area life. There have been no concrete alternatives for developmental disabilities in South Korea. But this study will show the desirable direction for a developmental disabilities policy in this country. It is also assumed that this study will illustrate from the Canadian experience what the Korean state should take into consideration and what it may predict when it executes the developmental disabilities policy. This study examined the philosophical and legal aspects of the policy and the environments in the process of developing the developmental disabilities policy in Ontario from 1970 to 2000. The policy for developmental disabilities in Ontario could secure its position to some degree despite a lot of controversies and difficulties. After all, this development resulted from the conviction of de-institutionalization and the concept of normalization which have buttressed the policy position to overcome those difficulties. A lesson which gained from the review of the developmental disabilities policy was the close cooperation for the program between the concerned authorities and the university. They joined together to promote the policy which could accrue to each other. This was made possible because the policy decision was based on the scientific planning and implementation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.005

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.269 · 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