MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605127631 · doi:10.35502/jcswb.35

Building the case for a National Outcomes Fund

2017· article· en· W2605127631 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sarah Doyle, Dale McFee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Community Safety and Well-Being · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCommunity Development and Social Impact
Canadian institutionsGovernment of SaskatchewanUniversity of ReginaImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Order (exchange)Dual (grammatical number)Element (criminal law)BusinessValue for moneyPublic administrationPublic policyService (business)Value (mathematics)Public economicsEconomic growthFinanceEconomicsPolitical scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper argues for the creation of a National Outcomes Fund as a critical element of a “social impact economy” that appropriately values and diverts resources to social good. This initiative would make funds available contingent on the achievement of targeted outcomes in priority policy areas. It would invite service providers, alongside ministries or other agencies from any order of government, to propose innovative solutions, with the dual objective of improving outcomes for individuals and communities and improving value for public money—which in some cases will correspond with a net decrease in government expenditures over time. It addresses policy recommendations primarily to the federal government, as well as to provincial, territorial, and municipal governments.

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)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.081
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.081
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.019
Scholarly communication0.0220.035
Open science0.0020.024
Research integrity0.0180.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Community Safety and Well-BeingSame topicCommunity Development and Social ImpactFrench-language works237,207