MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159393026 · doi:10.1080/13876988.2021.1894074

Comparative Public Policy Analysis of COVID-19 as a Naturally Occurring Experiment

2021· article· en· W3159393026 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Comparative Policy Analysis Research and Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisaster Management and Resilience
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversitySimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Political sciencePoliticsPandemicPublic policyState (computer science)Psychological resilience2019-20 coronavirus outbreakResilience (materials science)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Policy analysisPublic administrationSociologyPolitical economyBiologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This collection presents an effort to draw on the COVID-19 global pandemic, as a rare "naturally occurring experiment", to advance the comparative public policy scholarship and disseminate knowledge on international policy approaches to this extreme crisis situation. From a comparative lens, these articles reveal how factors such as partisan politics, intergovernmental relationships, culture, and state capacity shape crisis policy responses in contrast to normal policymaking. This collection also provides important lesson drawing: national–local coordination, social safety nets, and a well-organized sector of community workers are all part of a society's capacity and resilience in a time of crisis.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.020
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.308
GPT teacher head0.601
Teacher spread0.292 · 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