MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417215165 · doi:10.1080/10875549.2025.2599532

Alberta’s Social Policy Renaissance: A Critical Policy Study of Alberta’s Social Policy Framework and 10-Year Strategy to Reduce Poverty

2025· article· en· W4417215165 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Poverty · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial policyPovertyPublic policyPolicy analysisPolicy studiesSocial change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2013, the Government of Alberta created a social policy framework and engaged thousands of Albertans on ideas to reduce poverty; however, the government’s commitments remain unfulfilled. This article finds that the government viewed poverty as an individual issue that could be solved through responsibilization and actions that promoted economic growth. The actor(s) responsible for fulfilling the goals and commitments under the social policy framework and 10-year strategy to reduce poverty remain unclear since the government intends to transform and devolve its role as service provider, funder, and legislator to one of influencer, convener, and partner. In the decade since these engagements began, the government has experienced several changes in leadership, prompting the authors to investigate what, if anything, has changed in the government’s approach to poverty reduction since Alberta’s social policy renaissance, and what insights can be gleaned for those interested in ending poverty in the Alberta context.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.355 · 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