Exploring Generative Artificial Intelligence Techniques in Government: A Case Study
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
The swift progress of Generative Artificial intelligence (GenAI), notably Large Language Models (LLMs), is reshaping the digital landscape. Recognizing this transformative potential, the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) launched a pilot initiative to explore the integration of GenAI techniques into its daily operation for performance excellence, where 22 projects were launched in May 2024. Within these projects, this paper presents the development of the intelligent agent Pubbie as a case study, targeting the automation of performance measurement, data management and insight reporting at the NRC. Cutting-edge techniques are explored, including LLM orchestration and semantic embedding via RoBERTa, while strategic fine-tuning and few-shot learning approaches are incorporated to infuse domain knowledge at an affordable cost. The user-friendly interface of Pubbie allows general government users to input queries in natural language and easily upload or download files with a simple button click, greatly reducing manual efforts and accessibility barriers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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