MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125597034

From Curiosity to Wealth Creation: How University Research can Boost Economic Growth

2013· article· en· W3125597034 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueC.D. Howe Institute Commentary · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommercializationIntellectual propertyRevenueBusinessTechnology transferInstitutionEconomic growthMarketingEconomicsPolitical scienceFinanceInternational trade
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technological and scientific research are crucial to long-term economic growth. Canadians are three times as rich today as 50 years ago thanks to new products and processes. The source of technological innovation is research and development (R&D), most of which takes place in the private sector of the economy. University research, however, is the source of the basic building blocks of many of the core sectors of the economy, in everything from information technology to pharmaceuticals to much more. It is crucial for economic growth that the innovations that occur at Canadian universities get commercialized and find their way into the rest of economy. Canadian universities lag behind their US counterparts in generating technology transfer between academic research and companies. With innovation and productivity at the forefront of the Canadian public policy agenda, it is crucial that governments create the right incentives for university researchers to pursue research that can eventually be commercialized. Rather than governments directing researchers to pursue business-related research, the overarching priority for Canada should be to attract the best researchers in the world. Though it may seem paradoxical, the evidence supports the view that the greatest benefit to society will come from scientists for whom practical utility and individual financial reward are minor considerations. The best way to attract such scientists to Canada is to redirect our research support towards the problems that are most challenging from a scientific point of view, not towards those that bureaucrats view as most likely to lead to commercial success. Although the federal and provincial governments are taking steps to encourage the commercialization of research, they should go further by: • requiring that all federally funded research papers appear in open access online repositories; • developing a template available to all university researchers that outlines the terms of commercialization – such as intellectual property rights or revenues – between universities, researchers and their business partners; and • building on recent reforms to the National Research Council that make it more business-oriented, but with the eventual goal of making it a pan-Canadian technology transfer institution, leaving federal funding for research to granting organizations. Since business R&D has been falling as a share of the Canadian economy, and is a critical input to the commercialization of university research, it is also important that Canadian governments take measures to encourage Canadian businesses to invest in the commercialization process.

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.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.564
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.275 · 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