MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107952529 · doi:10.7202/1023839ar

Positionnement institutionnel et innovation dans le secteur public

2014· article· fr· W2107952529 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Luc Bernier, Taı̈eb Hafsi, Carl Deschamps

Bibliographic record

VenueTélescope Revue d’analyse comparée en administration publique · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsHEC MontréalÉcole Nationale d'Administration Publique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans le système de gouvernement britannique, il existe trois types d’organisations : les organismes centraux qui sont responsables de la coordination de l’appareil gouvernemental, les ministères qui gèrent les domaines liés aux politiques et les organisations autonomes qui sont dotées de missions plus spécialisées. On peut émettre une hypothèse selon laquelle les organismes centraux, étant à proximité des politiques, risquent d’être plus conservateurs en raison de leur tendance naturelle à éviter les risques et les questions embarrassantes pour les ministres desquels ils relèvent. Serait-il possible que l’éloignement des politiques favorise un plus grand espace pour innover ? Le présent article teste cette hypothèse à l’aide de données obtenues dans les candidatures au Prix de la gestion innovatrice de l’Institut d’administration publique du Canada. Excepté le cas des entreprises publiques, dont les résultats n’étaient pas significatifs, l’hypothèse est confirmée. La création d’agences gouvernementales permet l’innovation.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTélescope Revue d’analyse comparée en administration publiqueSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207