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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
T he European Union (EU) has witnessed a growth in innovative gover- nance in recent years, much of which is not well understood.This book offers a comprehensive account of what characterizes the modes of governance in various areas of EU policymaking.From the outset the project aimed at being more ambitious than most, asking what the specific characteristics of European modes of governance across policy areas are and how EU governance and policymaking differ from those at the national level.To embark on such an ambitious study obviously required major preparation.As editors and authors, we are indebted to institutions and people for the support we received along the way.The book is the product of half a decade of collaboration.We first met in 2003 at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne, Germany, where we were both visiting fellows on sabbatical leave.It was then that we started to think about working together on a major project.In 2004 we designed a research study in which we could identify the nature of EU governance and policymaking.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it