MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2480281085 · doi:10.29173/alr348

Smart Regulation — Rhetoric or Reality?

2015· article· en· W2480281085 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Judith Hanebury

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRegulation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsCanada Energy Regulator
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructuringRegulatory reformDeregulationRhetoricPhraseRelation (database)BusinessLaw and economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceLawComputer scienceMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines historical, contemporary, andemerging form of governmental regulation in various contexts and jurisdictions, and applies that information comparatively in undertaking descriptive and prescriptive analyses in relation to regulation in Canada's energy sector. So-called "smart regulation " is the latest trend in regulatory (re)structuring. and the author attempts to probe the substance behind this catch-phrase to discover what its practical implications are to affected parties. The reader will contemplate how "smart regulation " differs, if at all from prescriptive regulation, goal-oriented regulation, performance-based regulation, and deregulation or whether it is some combination of several. "Smart regulation" necessarily imports inter- and intra-governmental cooperation and coordination to avoid regulatory duplication and multi-layering; in this regard Canada's regulatory regime appears to be in transition. Accurately measuring the degree of regulatory and industrial efficiency and effectiveness resulting from the "smart regulation" movement may ultimately require more credible evaluation methodology and increased research in the area.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicRegulation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207