MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2726750016

La collaboration dans le secteur spatial canadien - une approche exploratoire combinant bibliométrie et sondages

2016· article· fr· W2726750016 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Annie Martin

Bibliographic record

VenuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RESUME : Dans cette ere de l’economie du savoir, l’innovation technologique est un important moteur de croissance et les facteurs de competitivite et de productivite qui y sont relies sont d’autant plus dependants des capacites a innover. Les acteurs des systemes d’innovation repoussent sans cesse les limites de l’etat de l’art, et les avancees techniques et technologiques se basent sur la creation de connaissances, mais aussi sur leur diffusion et transfert. Les sciences et les technologies coexistent et se nourrissent l’une de l’autre pour augmenter et accelerer les processus d’innovation. Cette interface entre la science et la technologie s’apparente souvent a cette delimitation que l’on observe entre les universites et les entreprises privees. Depuis plusieurs decennies, la collaboration universite-industrie a demontre un impact certain sur l’emergence de nouvelles technologies radicales, sur la creation de projets, et sur l’apport de solution a des problemes techniques de l’industrie, pour ne nommer que quelques exemples (Cohen et al., 2002; Kaufmann et Todtling, 2001). Stimuler l’innovation par le biais de collaborations interorganisationnelles est un concept mis de l’avant par plusieurs, dont le Programme d’innovation du Canada par le gouvernement canadien (2016) qui exprime la necessite des echanges entre les secteurs universitaire et industriel pour soutenir et stimuler les activites innovantes. Une des recommandations du rapport Emerson sur l’Examen du secteur aerospatial (2012) abonde dans le meme sens avec sa recommandation de faciliter la communication et la collaboration entre les entreprises, les chercheurs et les etablissements d’enseignement superieur. Dans le cadre de projets spatiaux, la collaboration du gouvernement est aussi importante puisque ce secteur est grandement controle par celui-ci (Szajnfarber et Weigel, 2010) sans compter qu’il detient certes une expertise considerable. Ce controle gouvernemental s’explique entre autres par le fait qu’il est le principal acteur en matiere de financement de projets spatiaux, en plus d’etre dans bien des cas le principal client. Finalement, les politiques nationales et internationales impliquent le gouvernement canadien comme interface de premier plan. Les collaborations interorganisationnelles sont donc bien souvent definies comme un objectif en soi dans le cadre de programmes gouvernementaux voire un prerequis pour la durabilite de ces programmes. Il n’est donc pas etonnant de constater l’accent mis sur les collaborations entre les universites, les entreprises privees et le gouvernement dans les documents du Gouvernement du Canada (par exemple dans le cadre de la politique spatiale du Canada, et du rapport sur les plans et les priorites de l’Agence spatiale canadienne (ASC)). Il demeure toutefois difficile de mesurer l’etat des pratiques collaboratives considerant les extrants multiples et les limites d’acces a certaines donnees. Le but principal de cette etude est d’explorer les tendances de collaboration dans le secteur spatial au Canada a l’aide de donnees accessibles publiquement, soit les publications scientifiques et un sondage distribue aux acteurs canadiens du secteur prive et des universites. Trois disciplines ont ete utilisees a titre d’etudes de cas afin d’explorer l’utilisation de la methodologie proposee pour analyser les activites de collaborations dans trois disciplines d’interet pour le Canada, soit l’observation de la Terre avec Radarsat, la medecine et les sciences de la vie ainsi que la robotique spatiale. Les indicateurs mesures ayant trait a la productivite, a la structure des reseaux, au positionnement des auteurs ainsi qu’aux habitudes de collaborations ont permis de tracer un portrait des collaborations et de quantifier et qualifier les liens qui unissent les diverses parties prenantes. Bien que les variables utilisees n’adressent qu’une portion des collaborations potentielles, cette etude exploratoire demontre la pertinence de l’utilisation d’une methodologie permettant de faire ressortir des faits saillants qui caracterisent les activites de recherche et d’innovation en spatial au Canada. Les resultats obtenus presentent les caracteristiques et la structure des reseaux en recherche et innovation spatiale au Canada en soulignant les differences et similitudes des etudes de cas choisies.----------ABSTRACT : Technological innovation, in concert with the underlying factors affecting competitiveness and productivity, is a driver for socio-economic growth in the present knowledge economy. The actors in the innovation systems are constantly pushing the state-of-the art through technical and technological advances based on the creation, diffusion and transfer of knowledge. In this context, science and technology coexist and nourish each other to accelerate innovation. This interface between science and technology is often associated with the delimitation between universities and private companies. Over the past decades, university-industry collaborations have demonstrated numerous benefits on technological breakthroughs, new projects and provision of technological solutions to solve industrial problems, to name a few (Cohen et al., 2002; Kaufmann and Todtling, 2001). Inter-organization collaboration has been identified by many scholars and decision makers as a key driver for innovation. As an example the Government of Canada’s Innovation Agenda (2016) highlights the necessity of university-industry collaboration to foster innovation. Also, one of Emerson’s report recommendations in the Aerospace Review Report (2012) is to facilitate communication and collaboration between private companies, researchers and universities. As for the space sector, collaboration with government organization is also important considering its oversight and control (Szajnfarber and Weigel, 2010) as well as its recognized expertise. This control is generally explained by its primary role in funding space projects in a monopsony market where it is the main client in a majority of disciplines. National and international policies and politics also position the government at the forefront of space activities. Inter-organizational collaboration is also often identified as an important objective in many government programs, even a prerequisite for public programs’ sustainability. It is therefore not surprising to notice this emphasis on university-industry partnerships in many Government of Canada’s publications (ex. Canada Space Policy Framework, Canadians Space Agency (CSA) reports on plans and priorities). One challenge remains in the assessment of collaborative practices considering the variety of outputs and availability of data. The main goal of this study is to explore the collaboration trends in the Canadian space sector using publicly available data, such as scientific publications, and a survey distributed to Canadian actors from universities and private companies. Three disciplines have been chosen as case studies to explore the use of the proposed methodology for the assessment and analysis of collaborative activities in three disciplines of interest for Canada: Earth observation with Radarsat, space medicine and life sciences, as well as space robotics. Indicators related to productivity, network structure, actors’ position in the networks and collaboration habits have been used to depict collaborative trends as well as to quantify and qualify linkages amongst the various actors. Even though the measures used only partially address the extent of potential collaboration, this exploratory study achieved to highlight the usefulness of such a methodology to characterize collaborative activities in space research and innovation in Canada. The results present specific aspects of network structures and outline interesting differences and similarities amongst the chosen case studies.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: yes · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationallow
gptBibliometricsMetaresearch
Domain: Evaluation · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: yes · About a Canadian topic: yes
Observationallow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

BibliometricsMetaresearch

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designObservational
DomainEvaluation
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal)Same topicRegional Development and PolicyCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207