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
This article summarizes recent developments relating to accountability. It examines institutional characteristics that diminish Parliament's ability to hold Ministers and Officials to account and looks at prospects for improved accountability in the future. T he Gomery Commission was given two mandates: to inquire and report on who was responsible for the sponsorship scandal; and, then, in a second report, to make recommendations t o a ddress shortcomings in the governance and accountability regime. The establishment of the commission of inquiry and the selection of a judge to be sole commissioner acknowledged the perceived limits of the parliamentary processes of holding ministers and officials to account, and thus the requirement of an “independent” commissioner, preferably someone seconded from the judicial branch of government. The commission did what was expected of it. It named many who were responsible in some manner; it blamed a smaller crowd; and, it shamed a few. There is no need to repeat the verdicts. However, it is worth noting that Gomery, in Volume 1, concluded that: “Three main factors…caused or contributed to the problems”. They were:
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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