Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences (CJAS) enjoys an excellent reputation for its high-quality scholarship that brings together all disciplines traditionally and more recently represented at business schools and departments related to administrative sciences. The multidisciplinary and bilingual character of the journal is unique in our journal landscape. Most recently, the new editorial team has expanded our portfolio to include new submission formats that will further strengthen our unique positioning and attract articles aiming at capitalizing on interdisciplinarity. While we retain our current submission options for research articles, our interdisciplinary lens will be strengthened by offering three more submission formats. The first two are closely connected. Phenomenon-driven submissions follow the Science and Nature format and focus on the discussion of data. We encourage discussion papers that offer reinterpretations of the original submission. The third new article format is policy papers. We believe that a journal offering a platform for interdisciplinary discussions is uniquely suited for offering policy advice, and we encourage submissions focused on policy. We currently have three special issues underway that will provide focus for submissions that address core challenges of our time. The launch special issue of phenomenon-driven papers invites submissions on grand challenges and is managed by our guest editors Benson Honig, Addisu Lashitew, Yuanfang Lin, Sandeep Mishra, Jon Thomas, and Peng Zhang. The two other special issues feature topics in Entrepreneurship, AI and Cybersecurity, as well as long-lived family firms. CJAS is popular in Canada and with a worldwide audience. Many schools in Canada have tenured faculty members who have relied on their publications in CJAS to contribute to favorable tenure decisions. We are committed to further strengthening our position as a part of the Canadian higher education landscape. In addition, we have appointed a range of internationally based editors, better reflecting the diverse submissions we receive, particularly from Asia, Europe, and South America, as well as from Africa and Australia. Our efforts to strengthen the journal in its entirety are also guided by our revised aims and scope that now read as follows: The Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences (CJAS) is a multidisciplinary and inter-disciplinary, peer-reviewed, international quarterly. Its purpose is to publish manuscripts that advance theory, deepen understanding of phenomena and advance policy across all key and emerging disciplinary areas of business. We welcome research articles that develop theory in a substantive and thought-provoking manner. Such articles can comprise literature reviews, quantitative and/or qualitative approaches, and conceptual pieces. Moreover, we encourage short phenomenon-driven submissions and related dialog pieces that offer the opportunity to examine and discuss interesting and engaging data. Furthermore, policy papers should synthesize insights from several disciplines and present compelling solutions, supported by empirical evidence, to address current and future policy challenges. In this way, CJAS is centrally concerned with curating theoretical and praxis-orientated foresight that will address 21st century issues. We are entering into this new age for CJAS, building on the excellent work of the previous editorial team and, notably, the outstanding leadership provided by Michel Laroche in steering the journal. Our Editors, Associate Editors, Guest Editors, and all the reviewers have worked hard and continue to do so aiming to grow the journal and increase its peer recognition. I also want to thank Shamsud D. Chowdhury, our outgoing President of ASAC, as well as the members of the Executive Board for their strong support of CJAS.
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 | 0.212 | 0.137 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.070 | 0.043 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.036 | 0.044 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.007 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".