Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the lead-up to the November 2007 general election, the Australian Labor Party, led by Kevin Rudd, announced its intention to repair a relationship between the Commonwealth government and the not-for-profit sector (NFPS), which it alleged had been �broken� by the Howard government. The key policy expression of this commitment would be a �compact� that would set the terms of engagement between the federal government, through its departments and agencies, and the NFPS. The Rudd Labor government�s pursuit of a compact followed the lead of governments overseas � most notably in the United Kingdom (1998) and Canada (2001) � whose landmark agreements set the benchmarks against which most other compacts are compared. It also followed in the wake of similar initiatives by state and territory governments over the previous decade. On 17 March 2010, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd launched the National Compact. Although an important milestone, the policy journey did not end with this event. This paper explores the implementation challenges confronting government and the NFPS and considers the prospects for an Australian compact in the light of overseas and Australian experiences.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".