MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2610220423 · doi:10.7202/1039107ar

Gouvernance et réseaux épistémiques : l’exemple de la politique de décentralisation au Chili

2017· article· fr· W2610220423 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Gouvernance · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPublic Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesCentralisationPolitical sciencePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Carolina Gutierrez Ruiz et Bastien Sibille ont recours à la notion de communauté épistémique pour analyser la gouvernance des réseaux de politiques dont le rôle premier est de créer les savoirs légitimes sur lesquels s’appuient subséquemment les décisions politiques et gouvernementales. À cette fin, l’analyse des auteures s’articulent à partir de deux questions, à savoir : 1. La création des communautés épistémiques est-elle liée à un besoin de savoir exprimé par les autorités politiques ? 2. L’intégration des savoirs nouveaux dans l’action publique se fait-elles à travers un transfert des idées ou plutôt un transfert des individus ? Pour répondre à ces questions, les auteurs se penchent sur la communauté épistémique qui a participé à développer et imposer la décentralisation politico-administrative au Chili.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.322 · 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