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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.
VenueJournal of Policy Analysis and Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of SingaporeCollege of Arts and Sciences, University of North CarolinaUniversity of Colorado DenverKorea Advanced Institute of Science and TechnologyUniversiteit MaastrichtNorthwestern UniversityYork UniversityNational Security AgencyUniversity of Notre DameOhio State UniversityNational University of SingaporeHeller School for Social Policy and ManagementCarnegie Mellon UniversityMaastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology, United Nations UniversityGeorgia State UniversitySyracuse UniversityUniversity of PittsburghSchool of Public and International Affairs, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityUniversity of Central FloridaPennsylvania State UniversityMaxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse UniversityUniversity of WashingtonJohns Hopkins UniversityJohns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public HealthUniversity of ChicagoBrandeis UniversityClaremont Graduate UniversityUniversity of OklahomaCleveland State UniversityHarvard UniversityGeorge Washington UniversityUniversity of PennsylvaniaGeorge Mason University
KeywordsListing (finance)SociologyAccountingPolitical sciencePsychologyBusinessFinance
Abstract
fetched live from OpenAlexNo abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.
No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.
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.
metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.444
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
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.
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
