MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101465825 · doi:10.1111/spol.12128

Diverging Paths? A Comparative Look at Childcare Policies in <scp>J</scp>apan, <scp>S</scp>outh <scp>K</scp>orea and <scp>T</scp>aiwan

2015· article· en· W2101465825 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Policy and Administration · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValue (mathematics)EconomicsBusinessChemistryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article compares state policies to support childcare in J apan, S outh K orea and T aiwan, using fuzzy set ideal type analysis to determine the nature of institutional arrangements with respect to labour, money and time provisions. We then note their implications for familialization and defamilialization in the three countries. Our analysis suggests a common pattern towards the increased use of financial support amongst the three countries over time; however, this commonality does not mean their childcare policies are converging, as the financial supports differ in focus, with J apan concentrating on familialization by valuing family care, and K orea exclusively employing policy to facilitate the use of market‐based care services. For its part, Taiwan has been strengthening familialization by increasing the leave compensation to value time off to provide care. The different labour, money and time dimensions vis‐à‐vis the familialization/defamilialization matrix suggest varying implications of institutional arrangements for gender.

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)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.289 · 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