MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385727433 · doi:10.3138/cpp.2022-060

What Are Contemporary Rural Development Policies? A Pan-Canadian Content Analysis of Government Strategies, Plans, and Programs for Rural Areas

2023· article· fr· W4385727433 on OpenAlex
Tamara Krawchenko, Brooke Hayes, Karen Foster, Sean Markey

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversitySimon Fraser UniversityUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesRural developmentGeographyAgricultureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au Canada, des débats de longue date ont lieu sur la manière de concevoir des politiques efficaces pour répondre aux besoins des diverses communautés rurales. Le présent article fait le point sur les politiques rurales canadiennes en procédant à une analyse globale du contenu des stratégies, des plans et des programmes des gouvernements provinciaux et territoriaux. Cette analyse révèle que bon nombre des critiques récurrentes concernant les politiques rurales restent pertinentes aujourd’hui, notamment le cloisonnement sectoriel, le manque d’intégration des politiques et la perception permanente des régions rurales comme étant des sites d’extraction détachés de l’investissement. Cette étude souligne également l’importance des approches en matière de politique émanant des territoires du Nord canadien qui démontrent des approches intégrées du développement économique rural.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.189 · 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