MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1799948343

The Roles, Mechanism and Realization Path of Incorruption Culture to Avoid Incorruption Risk

2015· article· en· W1799948343 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

VenueCanadian social science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicResearch, Science, and Academia
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDual (grammatical number)Product (mathematics)Language changeRealization (probability)Function (biology)Government (linguistics)BusinessMechanism (biology)Process (computing)Law and economicsPoliticsRisk analysis (engineering)Political scienceSociologyLawComputer scienceEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Incorruption risk refers to a kind of possibility that party and government leading cadres conduct corrupt behavior in the process of realizing their duties or in their political life. Incorruption culture is the product of the combination of incorruption construction and culture construction, which acts as system background in avoiding incorruption risk. Thus, to strengthen the construction of anti-corruption, it is necessary to emphasize the role of the incorruption system, and pay more attention to the incorruption culture, which is the basis of system construction. Bring the construction of incorruption culture into the system of punishing and preventing corruption. Realize the dual function of incorruption culture (“cure” and “prevention”) in avoiding incorruption risk.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.313 · 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