Introduction: Building a Circumpolar Innovation Agenda
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Governments have almost uniformly concluded that innovation is the key for long-term economic prosperity and for improvements in the quality of life for people around the world (e.g., Prime Minister's Offi ce, Finland 2015; Industry Canada 2017). New and adapted scientifi c and technological innovations have included, for example, nanofi ltration water fi lters that are producing clean drinking water for people in sub-Saharan Africa, high-speed wireless services for remote parts of Africa, GPS-based navigation systems that are improving transportation systems, social-media powered commercial operations from Airbnb to Uber, and medical technologies embedded in smartphones. However, litt le of this government supported and private-sector funded innovation eff ort has fi ltered through to the Circumpolar World. Northern regions often get later and smaller versions of southern innovations, with very few north-centred developments. For instance, while the Internet is generally available in all but the smallest and most remote communities, it is often characterized by minimal speeds, poor reliability, and extremely high costs (especially in northern Canada, Dobby 2016a; 2016b; FCM 2017). Thus, for the people of the Circumpolar World, the technological revolution has made comparatively few inroads. Equally important, the challenges facing this region have garnered signifi cantly less att ention from innovation stakeholders.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it