MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2223116490

Six Quick Hits for Canadian Commercialization

2005· article· en· W2223116490 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brian Güthrie, Trefor Munn-Venn

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommercializationInternshipAction planBusinessAction (physics)Investment (military)Work (physics)Public relationsManagementPlan (archaeology)Public administrationPolitical scienceMarketingEngineeringEconomicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Conference Board of Canada created theLeaders' Roundtable on Commercialization to establish a sharedcommercialization vision for Canada and an action plan that recognizes theunique challenges facing various sectors and regions.Composed of47senior business executives, university presidents and deputy ministers, thisroundtable conducted 35 interviews with scholars, firm executives, andgovernment officers to gain insight into tactical actions (quickhits) that can be taken within the next 12 months to address problems andseize opportunities in commercialization. These actions are the subject of this report.The quick hits arecategorized into people, research, financing, and institutions.The quickhits identified include the following: (1) industry-led collaborative researchnetworks, (2) regionally-based commercialization internships, (3) angel taxcredits, (4) pilot program to expand R&D tax credits, (5) strategicprocurement, and (6) federal seed capital investment. For each of the quick hits, anexplanation of the action, a rationale,and how it will be measured are provided.An integrated, long-termstrategy has yet to be developed, but these quick hits provide a foundation forthe work of this roundtable. (SRD)

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0270.005
Scholarly communication0.0120.004
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207