Gender Based Analysis (GBA) in Canada: What Can Sectoral Ministries do in India?
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
Prima facie evidence may suggest that Canadian experience of GBA contribute little to the process of gender budgeting in India as Finance Canada is outside the purview of GBA. But the point to be noted is that Canadian experience of GBA across Federal Departments throws light to a significant institutional networking system to establish gender budgeting across identified Departments in India from the limited purview of macro-scan of Union Budgets. At the same time, as Indian experience revolves around gender analysis of budgets and Canadian experience is more comprehensive across various Federal Departments but excluding the engendering of budgeting process in Finance Canada, the learning process is definitely symbiotic. This symbiotic process can ensure a two-way learning process between India and Canada in the realm of gender mainstreaming. Canada can draw lessons from India on integrating gender perspective in budgetary policies and India can draw lessons from Canada on the strategies and tools of mainstreaming gender across various Ministries/Departments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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