MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547600055 · doi:10.1080/09654313.2016.1244516

A review of (almost) 20 years of regional innovation systems research

2016· review· en· W2547600055 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Planning Studies · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsRegional scienceField (mathematics)Work (physics)Regional innovation systemPolitical scienceSociologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The literature on regional innovation systems (RISs) has grown impressively in the last two decades. The objective of this study is to provide a comprehensive assessment of all RIS articles published in scholarly journals between 1998 and 2015. It aims to inform researchers of the empirical results obtained so far and highlight areas that need further work. This review describes how the RIS field has developed, charts the current body of RIS research and discusses recommendations for moving the RIS field forward.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.583
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.018 · 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