MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014082094 · doi:10.1080/08985620701795525

Is regional innovation system development possible in peripheral regions? Some evidence from the case of La Pocatière, Canada

2008· article· en· W2014082094 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

VenueEntrepreneurship and Regional Development · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRegional innovation systemKey (lock)Innovation systemRegional scienceRegional developmentEconomic geographyPolitical scienceBusinessSociologyGeographyIndustrial organizationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this paper is to contribute to a greater understanding of the research on innovation systems in peripheral regions by providing a detailed account of the case of the La Pocatière region in Canada. In analysing this case, we raise the following two questions: (1) what are the actors and structure of the innovation system in La Pocatière?; (2) what are the key factors and dynamics leading to innovation activity, as well as to the transformation and growth of this regional innovation system? The empirical bases for the analyses are derived from various sources: historical documents, statistical data, and in-depth interviews with key individuals in private and public organizations.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.218 · 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