Bibliographic record
Abstract
as significant anniversaries are wont to do, canada's sesquicentenary inspired a number of projects of stock-taking and forecasting along the country's evolutionary path.This volume is the product of one such project.in november 2017, members of the canadian policy community gathered at a two-day conference at the University of Toronto to reflect on public policymaking in canada -to look both back at what the country has accomplished in the fifty years since its centennial, and forward at what it can hope to achieve in the decades to come.The conference was guided by an appreciation of the legacy of the burst of policymaking that characterized the centennial era, and by recognition of the magnitude of the country's contemporary challenges. it was animated by the idea that the challenges facing canada today require a rethinking of public policy akin to what occurred five decades earlier, but tailored to the country's current demographic, economic, and social realities.How do the policy paths established in the centennial era, and shaped over subsequent decades, position us to address neglected and emerging policy problems?which policies need to be built upon, which discarded, and which created anew?This volume presents the policy agenda that emerged from this conference.it opens with an assessment of canada's experience with innovative public policymaking in the last fifty years. in each of the following sections, policy experts address a core challenge for canadian policymaking.although the conference sessions from which these papers are drawn were organized around specific areas of public policy, certain themes emerged across sessions.This volume is organized to reflect these unanticipated but serendipitous synergies.Part one explores the different experiences and outlooks of successive generational cohorts as they confronted questions of investing for the future.Part Two
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.472 | 0.280 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".