MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989098732 · doi:10.4018/jegr.2006100104

E-Government and Multi-Level Governance

2006· article· en· W1989098732 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Electronic Government Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Immigration
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalistGovernment (linguistics)Public administrationDemocracyContext (archaeology)Corporate governanceState (computer science)Administration (probate law)Political scienceBusinessPoliticsLawGeographyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

E-government is entering its second decade as a widely-embraced agenda for public sector reform. There are often distinctions made between e-government as administrative reform and e-governance as democratic reform, although there is invariable overlap between both spheres. In this context, the purpose of this paper is to undertake an examination of the impacts of e-government on both administration and democracy in a multi-level governance environment. In doing so, we will provide a comparative assessment of two sub-national jurisdictions known for investing aggressively in e-government in recent years: Catalonia, Spain, and Ontario, Canada. This investigation will thus seek to identify the manner by which the pursuit of e-government by a state and a province is intertwined with – or separate from federalist structures.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.895
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.332 · 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