MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173292111 · doi:10.4000/ethiquepublique.5853

Le Bureau de l’inspecteur général de la ville de Montréal : une institution essentielle à la lutte pour l’intégrité dans la réalisation des contrats publics de la métropole québécoise

2021· article· fr· W3173292111 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Me Brigitte Bishop

Bibliographic record

VenueÉthique Publique · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical sciencePublicsHumanitiesArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Créé en 2014, au cœur de la commission Charbonneau portant sur la collusion et la corruption dans les contrats publics, le Bureau de l’inspecteur général de la Ville de Montréal lutte contre la corruption et pour l’intégrité à toutes les étapes d’un contrat municipal, de l’appel d’offres à la réalisation, et par le biais de ses volets sur la formation et la prévention, l’analyse et la préenquête ainsi que l’enquête. À partir souvent de dénonciations, le Bureau a enquêté et produit une trentaine de rapports qui ont conduit à la résiliation de contrats publics ou à d’importants changements de pratique organisationnelle, et surtout, à restaurer la confiance de la population montréalaise envers l’administration municipale.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.490
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉthique PubliqueSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207