How Big Is a Policy Network? An Assessment Utilizing Data From Canadian Royal Commissions 1970–2000
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The subsystem approach to policy studies is now well established in theory. Despite many applications to empirical cases, however, many elements of the operationalization of this approach have remained problematic, prompting some critics to reject it as “unscientific.” Although the approach has been defended as “more than a metaphor,” it is certainly apparent that additional work is required to address fundamental aspects of the model and ensure that its application to specific cases is done in such a way as to meet basic methodological prerequisites of consistency and replication. This article builds on earlier work by one of the authors attempting to address some of these concerns. Specifically, it addresses issues surrounding the methods through which subsystem membership can be identified and attempts some preliminary conclusions with respect to the estimation of average subsystem size in contemporary advanced liberal democracies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it