MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conclusion

2016· book-chapter· en· W4235347747 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth Adamson

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Press eBooks · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationWelfareOrder (exchange)Immigration policySocial policyPolitical scienceSociologyRelation (database)Economic growthEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter concludes by bringing together the previous chapters to consider the significance of the findings. In particular, it reflects on: what has changed, why it is has changed, and why it matters for social policy. It provides some further thoughts about the significance of the book for the concept of care culture and for regime typologies. It summarises how the patterns, policies and cultures of in-home childcare in Australia, the UK and Canada differ in multiple ways, in relation to funding, regulation and immigration. Some policy lessons and best practices are outlined in order to improve inequities among families, quality for children, and working conditions for care workers. It is argued that by using in-home childcare as a lens to analyse and compare ECEC policy, and by incorporating migration policy into the analysis, the differences among this liberal welfare regime type are magnified.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicy Press eBooksSame topicRural development and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207