MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010801927 · doi:10.22230/src.2020v11n1a351

Internationalization and the Internet: The Case of Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de politiques

2020· article· en· W3010801927 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Michael R. Veall

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarly and Research Communication · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceRevenueCitationThe InternetHumanitiesLibrary scienceBusinessLawArtFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Choices facing a Canadian scholarly journal such as Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de politiques (CPP/Adp) include both its degree of Canadian content and its level of internet accessibility.
 Analysis The “Canadian-ness” of CPP/Adp handicaps its upward citation score trend but is intrinsic to informing Canadian public policy. Internet open access would not likely boost citation scores but would likely enhance its policy role. Open access hasn large negative revenue implications.
 Conclusion and implications CPP/Adp chose not to reapply for the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Aid to Scholarly Journal program. e revenue loss of meeting the program’s new open access criteria, even with the permitted one-year embargo, was estimated to exceed the prospective grant. e CPP/Adp continues other timely ways to make content internet accessible.Contexte Les choix pour une revue savante canadienne telle que Canadian Public Policy/Analyse de politiques (CPP/Adp) incluent à la fois sa proportion de contenu canadien et son accessibilité sur internet.
 Analyse Le caractère canadien de CCP/Adp limite combien on le cite mais est indispensable par ce qu’il contribue à la politique publique canadienne. À ce titre, un libre accès à la revue sur internet ne ferait probablement pas augmenter son indice de citations mais améliorerait son impact sur les politiques. Le libre accès en revanche occasionnerait une baisse de revenus.
 Conclusion et implications CPP/Adp a choisi de ne pas se réinscrire au programme Aide aux revues savantes du Conseil de recherches en sciences humaines. CPP/Adp, en rencontrant les nouveaux critères de ce programme pour le libre accès—même avec la période d’embargo de 12 mois permise—perdrait davantage de revenus que le montant probable de la subvention. CPP/Adp a donc recours à d’autres méthodes opportunespour rendre son contenu accessible en ligne.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarly and Research CommunicationSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207