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
Purpose – This exploratory article aims to define foresight and consider its use in public management. Impediments to foresight best practices are also discussed. Design/methodology/approach – The research is based on the literature, including both primary and secondary sources. Canada serves as a case study to discuss foresight practices. Findings – Foresight has the potential to be useful from a governance perspective. Foresight practices, however, are limited by the need to overcome departmental boundaries, political impediments and, arguably, governments' abating policy capacity. Research limitations/implications – The purpose of this article is to introduce foresight limiting to an extent the depth of the analysis. Canada is neither a foresight leader nor at the bottom of the list. Conclusions drawn from this case are, despite differing political and administrative contexts, representative of problems faced by many governments in using foresight. Originality/value – The field of public management has paid little attention to foresight, though governments do make use of this instrument. This article is one of the first to consider foresight, not from the perspective of the futures field, but from that of the discipline of public management.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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