MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Research Data Centre Programme in Canada: a holistic approach to evidence‐based research to inform public policy

2003· article· en· W2093659788 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 Social Science Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicdemographic modeling and climate adaptation
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfidentialitySocial researchData archiveSocial securityLibrary scienceSociologyPolitical sciencePublic administrationPublic relationsComputer scienceSocial scienceLawDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of a response to the challenges that confront Canadian policy research, a joint task force assembled by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) and Statistics Canada proposed the creation of a series of Research Data Centres (RDCs). The network of RDCs was formally launched in December 2000 with the opening of the centre at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario. The RDCs are located throughout the country, so researchers are not obliged to travel to Ottawa to access Statistics Canada data. At the same time, the centres are administered in accordance with all the confidentiality rules required under the Statistics Act . The Research Data Centres meet, in a single location, both the need to facilitate access to detailed micro‐data for crucial social research and the need to protect the confidentiality and security of Canadians' information.

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)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.117
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.117
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.014
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0070.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.848
GPT teacher head0.592
Teacher spread0.255 · 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