Pragmatic Regulatory Design: The Case of Human Pathogens and Toxins Regulations in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article étudie les tensions liées à la régulation des activités d’organisations innovantes et souples dans un but de santé et de sécurité publiques. À travers une analyse de cas longitudinale, il retrace comment un organisme gouvernemental a décidé d’une réglementation 1) qui tenait compte de la pratique et de la multiplicité des expériences des cibles, 2) après s’être renseigné et avoir dialogué avec elles, et 3) en tenant compte des ressources disponibles. Une telle approche qualifiée de « pragmatique » essaie d’articuler simultanément la conception réglementaire, les possibilités d’application et les capacités organisationnelles. L’article discute enfin des conséquences de ce processus décisionnel sur l’organisation régulée et sur la santé et la sécurité publiques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.046 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".