MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025785376 · doi:10.7202/1068562ar

Les sites d’intégration des think tanks canadiens depuis 1985*

2020· article· fr· W3025785376 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Julien Landry

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin d histoire politique · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPolitical Influence and Corporate Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceLibrary scienceArtComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le paysage des laboratoires d’idées canadiens n’a connu son véritable essor qu’au cours du dernier tiers du XX e siècle, mais il comporte aujourd’hui une diversité importante d’organisations oeuvrant à produire et diffuser des connaissances, des analyses et des commentaires relatifs aux politiques publiques fédérales, provinciales et internationales. En avançant une conception des think tanks comme étant insérés dans des communautés distinctes, cet article propose une analyse de la création des laboratoires d’idées canadiens en fonction des principaux sites de leur intégration, soit : les universités, la fonction publique, les partis politiques, les débats idéologiques et divers réseaux de politiques publiques spécialisés.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.196 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin d histoire politiqueSame topicPolitical Influence and Corporate StrategiesFrench-language works237,207