Comparing Public Sector Innovation in Cross- Border Cooperation: A Set-Theoretic Approach
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
This article analyses innovation by developing and empirically applying the concept of public sector innovation in cross-border cooperation. The focus on intra- as well as inter-institutional characteristics provides a conceptual framework for identifying empirical differences and shared characteristics revealing different types of innovation. The proposed typology is operationalised with six dimensions and empirically applied to 24 cases in the two border regions on the island of Ireland and on the Upper Rhine. On an organisational level, four ideal types are developed, i.e. (1) managers of the status quo, (2) relational innovators, (3) organisational innovators, and (4) public sector innovators in cross-border cooperation. The results reveal empirical diversity of public sector innovation in cross-border cooperation and can be regarded as a starting point for the development of a systematic and generalisable description of public sector innovation in cross-border cooperation
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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