MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107563466 · doi:10.1093/pa/gsr065

Strengthening Citizen Participation in Public Policy-Making: A Canadian Perspective

2011· article· en· W2107563466 on OpenAlex
Michael R. Woodford, Shaun R. Preston

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

VenueParliamentary Affairs · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Administration Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeliberationCitizen journalismPublic administrationPublic participationAccountabilityPerspective (graphical)Political scienceGovernment (linguistics)Public policyPublic relationsPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Citizen participation has a longstanding history in Canadian policy-making. Recently, strengthening citizen participation in national policy issues has been a priority. Most noteworthy is the introduction of citizen engagement which integrates deliberation-based methods into participatory policy initiatives. To enhance participation in other jurisdictions, we analyse efforts to transform participation in Canada. Also, to extend efforts to improve participation in Canada and beyond, we analyse specific developments related to institutionalising participation and fostering government accountability. We offer recommendations that we believe can contribute to future efforts to foster meaningful public participation around the world.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.844
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.297 · 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