Bibliographic record
Abstract
For government to be effective and to serve the public interest, politicians and bureaucrats must often work in tandem, hand in glove, especially in the development and implementation of public policy. At such times, the separation between the political and the bureaucratic functions is fluid and porous, and the executive branch of government is characterized by the interdependence of these political and bureaucratic spheres. At other times, a virtually impenetrable wall insulates the bureaucratic from the political sphere, as in the context of prosecutorial discretion in the criminal justice context. The questions across these various governmental settings are these: How independent should public servants be from the government of the day, and how can this independence be assured? This article seeks to address these questions about the nature and scope of bureaucratic independence, examine its sources in Canada's constitutional order, and explore its implications for public law and public administration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.102 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".