MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917613762 · doi:10.7202/1056260ar

Structuring Effect of the EU Framework Programmes in Estonia? The Case of Sociology

2019· article· en· W2917613762 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Teele Tõnismann

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Gouvernance · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPolitical Influence and Corporate Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormativeStructuringContext (archaeology)EliteDisciplinePolitical sciencePublic administrationCompetition (biology)European unionSociologyRegional scienceSocial scienceEconomicsLawEconomic policyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article analyzes the extent that a European funding instrument, the Framework Programme (FP), has affected the structuring of sociologists’ project collaboration practices in a post-communist Estonia, which joined the EU in 2004. It is hypothesized that to better understand how the FP has structured the sociology discipline in Estonia, its usage should be studied in two distinct levels of academic context; the national and disciplinary levels. Science administrative elite have used the FP as a normative model for implementing national research funding policy reforms. In the case of sociologists, these reforms have engendered a partial auto-exclusion from competition for national grants perceived as highly competitive and resulted in an orientation towards commissioned contract funding both at a national and European level. This exposes the limited structuring effect of the FP in Estonia, a country otherwise considered an exemplary participant in EU programs.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue GouvernanceSame topicPolitical Influence and Corporate StrategiesFrench-language works237,207