MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281624217 · doi:10.1080/02508060.2022.2072149

Boldly boring: public banks and public water in the Nordic region

2022· article· en· W4281624217 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueWater International · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic, financial, and policy analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBusinessCommercializationWater industryPublic financeWater infrastructurePublic sectorWater supplyEconomic policyFinancePolitical scienceEconomyEconomicsEnvironmental scienceMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Public banks in Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark have played a critical role in financing the costs of public water services in the Nordic region for over a century. A pooled banking model, collectively owned and operated by municipal and/or national governments, has allowed public water operators to obtain financing at the lowest possible rates, improving services and protecting their public status. It is not without its challenges, including threats of privatization and commercialization of public water operators and public banks, but this Nordic model has much to offer global debates about public financing of public water services.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.160 · 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