Completing the ‘Three-Peat’: Recent Provincial Elections in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
British Columbia held its 39th General Election on May 12, 2009. It produced a result very close to the previous election in May, 2005, with Gordon Campbell’s Liberal Government returned with 48% of the popular vote and 49 of 85 seats (or 57.6% of the MLA’s) in an expanded British Columbia legislature. For Gordon Campbell, his victory to a third term made him only the fourth Premier in British Columbia to be elected for a third term, and the first since William Bennett and the Socreds from the mid 1970’s to the mid 1980’s. Until Gordon Campbell, all First Ministers since 1986 had served no more than one term, some considerably less. (VanderZalm, Johnston, Harcourt, Clark, Miller and Dosanjh (between 1986 and 2001 – an average of 2.5 years each), During this decade and a half of electoral turmoil, British Columbia became the first Canadian jurisdiction with Recall and Initiative legislation, as well as adding a separate Referendum Act. To understand the 2009 result, having an idea of its prelude is helpful. That prelude included two General Elections – in 1996 and 2001 which were controversial and resulted in British Columbia’s shift to fixed election dates for 2005 and 2009. The latter two elections both also included a referendum on electoral reform. Both of these failed.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".