Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is the first issue online of revue gouvernance.This journal is a companion to Optimumonline.Both journals are publishing papers in English and French, but while optimumonline is an issue-based journal, a who-what-where-when journal, revue gouvernance is an explanation-based journal, a why-how journal.Moreover, revue gouvernance is not restricted to public management.It is attempting to provide explanations for governance success and failures in the private, public and social sectors.Very much like Optimumonline, revue gouvernance is a joint product of the Governance and Public Management Program of the School of Political Studies at the University of Ottawa, of Inveniré4, and The Summit Group.This first issue is a transitional issue.It picks up where the paper issues left.Its content is an echo of this transition phase.Luc Juillet has taken the responsibility for the selection and editing of this first web-based issue.This first web-based issue opens with a paper of Christian Rouillard and Louise Lemire comparing two groups of new retirees of the Canadian federal public service: a group that benefited from a program to help them move into retirement and another that did not benefit from it.They find that the programs were not effective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".