MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Public Policy Survey Method Research Based on Multi-Fit Perspective

2011· article· en· W1794176346 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Wei Fan, Xuejun Cai, Lushan Pan, Hao Jiao

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicPublic Administration, ICT, and Policy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Public policySubject matterPolitical scienceSurvey researchDomain (mathematical analysis)Survey methodologyPolicy studiesPublic domainKey (lock)Public relationsManagement scienceComputer scienceSociologyEconomicsMathematicsComputer securityGeographyArtificial intelligenceStatisticsSocioeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on the review of in and out country public policy researches, We summarize the difference between our country public policy research method and the overseas related domain, Totally 79 public policy research articles are reviewed. Then, we has constructed three dimensional model of the public policy research subject matter, including three dimensions namely the procedure, the result appraisal and the interaction and integrity. Finally, some suggestions for the result application are proposed. Key words: Public Policy; Survey Method; Multi-fit Perspective

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.514
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.040 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicPublic Administration, ICT, and Policy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207