MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Measuring the roles universities play in regional innovation systems: a comparative study between Chilean and Canadian natural resource-based regions

2011· article· en· W1989926302 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

VenueScience and Public Policy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Innovation
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegional scienceResource (disambiguation)Natural (archaeology)Economic geographyGeographyNatural resourcePolitical scienceBusinessComputer scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Universities can play critical roles in regional industrial development through innovation and entrepreneurship clusters. Formally managing this function in an integrated fashion is not well practiced by many universities. To improve this practice, we define the roles that universities can play and numerical indicators to measure them. Most world regions are ‘peripheral’ to a few core areas where academic research concentrates. Peripheral regions depend heavily on natural resource industries in both developed and developing countries. Therefore, we study universities involved with wine, salmon culture, mining and eco-tourism, and collect original comparative data from four universities in Canada and four in Chile. They are mostly small schools in peripheral regions, but among the national leaders in involvement with the local resource industry.

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
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.690
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.171 · 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