MétaCan
Menu
Cohort builder

4,299,418 works, Canadian by any of four routes.

Every filter state is a URL; the URL is the query; the query is citable via /q/⟨hash⟩. The page, the API and the export parse the same parameters.

The current cohort, streamed from the database: every work column, the machine labels, the provisional scores, and the per-row validation status. Exports are capped at 100,000 rows. Mints a permanent /q/ link for this exact query. The same filters always produce the same link, whoever asks.

Search term
Author
Year range
Sort
Language
Type
Field
Venue
Canadian parliamentary review
Topic
Retraction
Abstract
Evidence source
Study design
Label agreement
Label status

Direct Codex and Gemma labels are unvalidated and sparse. Distilled predictions cover the full frame and are also unvalidated. Choose the evidence source explicitly; absence of a direct label is never a negative label.

affaffiliation
fundfunder
venuejournal
aboutaboutness

The four routes compose: require the funder route and exclude affiliation to get the funder-only stratum no affiliation-based frame ever sees.

1,210 results · 1 filter active ·
Results by year
20002021
Publication date
Categories
Machine labels · sparse coverage
Evidence
Language
Type
Citations
An unlabeled work is unknown, not a negative. Label coverage is reported on every query.
1,210 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 17 of 25

Labels cover 3 of 1,210 works in this cohort. The rest are unlabeled, which is not a negative label: the label table is sparse today and grows as labeling rounds land.

Distilled predictions cover 1,210 of 1,210 works in this cohort. Predictions are machine_predicted_unvalidated. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work (title-only); the Codex side is a distilled, calibrated classifier. Candidate is the union; consensus is the intersection.

venueno affno abstractunlabeled
Specialized Resources for Parliamentary Libraries
Andrea M. Hyde, Heather Close
2020· article· en· Canadian parliamentary review· Computer Science
machine prediction:candidate · scholarly_communicationconsensus · none
0
citations
venueno affno abstractunlabeled
脳血管障害 3)Cerebral Microbleeds
今泉俊雄
2010· article· en· Canadian parliamentary review· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
venueno affno abstractunlabeled
Fairness in Committees
Rob Walsh
2008· article· en· Canadian parliamentary review· Business, Management and Accounting
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
venueno affno abstractunlabeled
Technology in the legislature: a roundtable
Ed Buckingham, Warren Michelson, Russ Hiebert
2009· article· en· Canadian parliamentary review· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
venueno affno abstractunlabeled
Reflections on the speakership
Peter Milliken
2011· article· en· Canadian parliamentary review· Psychology
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
venueno affno abstractunlabeled
II.肝臓 8.肝移植
須郷広之, 川崎誠治
2007· article· en· Canadian parliamentary review
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
venueno affno abstractunlabeled
Parliamentarians Discuss Parliamentary Libraries: Roundtable
Kevin O'Reilly, Liz Hanson, Nathan Neudorf, Shane Getson
2020· article· en· Canadian parliamentary review· Health Professions
machine prediction:candidate · scholarly_communicationconsensus · none
0
citations
venueaboutno affunlabeled
The Status of French in Alberta: A Rejoinder
Alfred Thomas Neitsch
2009· article· en· Canadian parliamentary review· Social Sciences
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations
venueno affno abstractunlabeled
画像 2 MRIによるミエリンイメージング
藤吉兼浩, 畑純一, 疋島啓吾, 辻収彦, 中原仁, 中村雅也 +1 more
2019· article· ja· Canadian parliamentary review· Engineering
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
0
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About