MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964984501 · doi:10.5931/djim.v5i1.44

E-government: The Canadian Experience

2010· article· en· W1964984501 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueDalhousie Journal of Interdisciplinary Management · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicE-Government and Public Services
Canadian institutionsSaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Context (archaeology)E-GovernmentService (business)Service delivery frameworkBusinessPublic relationsPublic administrationPolitical scienceMarketingInformation and Communications TechnologyGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

  The Canadian government was one of the first administrations to adapt to an online service delivery model and was distinguished early on as one of the most innovative in the development of its e-government tool. This article explores the Canadian government's experience with going online and utilizing an e-government tool to deliver government services. This paper will reflect on the birth and evolution of the e-government tool in the Canadian context and will also investigate the initial forecasts and promises made by the Government of Canada in terms of reducing costs of service delivery, increased accessibility for citizens, improved information retrieval, and security concerns of users, to determine what the Government of Canada's e-government initiative has accomplished.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.290 · 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