MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6967973663 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15878281

120 Reports on the Context Analysis (including inventory of 120 context profiles)

2025· article· en· W6967973663 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Communication sourceProcess (computing)InnovatorIdentity (music)Scientific literatureTask (project management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This document is part of T3.2 (Conducting Context Analysis improving transferability & spreading of best practices) within the Grazing4Agroecology project. It presents the outcomes of the Context Analysis, which includes an inventory of 121 context profiles showcasing innovative practices implemented by grazing-based farming systems in an agroecological perspective. Building on the methodological framework outlined in Deliverable D3.8, which provides guidelines for conducting a context analysis, this task was carried out between the project months 3 and 32. Context Analysis is a process that combines best practices with scientific knowledge to enhance thetransferability and adoption of innovations, thus providing a tool making the dissemination and application of innovations more efficient. An innovation will only be an innovation and have a positive impact where it fits. We believe that innovations and new ideas should be evaluated to narrow to environments in which they might be applied. This would greatly increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the process. The Context Analysis is meant to provide a link between the innovator and the wider farming community. In order to make things work there should be a certain degree of identity between the sender and potential receivers9. In this sense, the sender is the innovation in the context of origin and the receiving end is the environment which is supposed to be improved through implementing this innovation. The degree of identity is what must be assessed to allow for a successful transfer.The Context Analysis serves as a bridge between local innovation and broader application. By combining practice-based knowledge with scientific evaluation, the aim is to identify and refine innovations that can be adapted and transferred across different European regions. This approach supports more effective dissemination and adoption by highlighting the conditions under which specific practices are most likely to succeed. The goal is to transform locally grounded insights into transferable knowledge, offering a valuable tool for farmers and other stakeholder categories seeking to apply different innovations in varied contexts across Europe.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.210 · 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