MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402850793 · doi:10.1787/1a110ac3-en

Green budgeting in the Government of Canada

2024· report· en· W4402850793 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOECD papers on budgeting. · 2024
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Development and Environmental Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)BusinessGeographyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper looks at green budgeting practices in the Government of Canada relative to the OECD Green Budgeting Framework and best practices by OECD Members. It focuses on Canada’s efforts to enhance its reporting of incremental expenditure in the federal budget that is attributable to climate and environmental goals, as well as to enhance the use of green budgeting alongside other strategic budget initiatives in the federal government. The OECD had specific regard for the objectives of the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, the Quality of Life Framework, the Gender Results Framework, including the Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA Plus) tool, and the 2024 Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment and its supporting tool, the Climate, Nature and Economy Lens.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOECD papers on budgeting.Same topicSustainable Development and Environmental PolicyFrench-language works237,207