MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2915257095 · doi:10.51952/9781447334927.ch006

Policy analysis in local government

2018· book-chapter· en· W2915257095 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Henstra

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Press eBooks · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocal governmentPolitical scienceBusinessPublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter focuses on policy analysis and policy capacity of local governments in Canada. It discusses the nature of local public policy issues, the dynamics of local policy-making, the demand for policy analysis in local government and the specific analytical techniques used by local policy workers. Drawing on content analysis of relevant documents and interviews with municipal policy workers, the chapter presents new evidence about policy analysis at the local level, which has traditionally received less research attention than policy work at the federal and provincial levels.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0090.015
Scholarly communication0.0120.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicy Press eBooksSame topicRegional Development and PolicyFrench-language works237,207