MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W189547605

Central banks and supreme courts: a comparison of monetary and judicial processes and transparency

2002· article· en· W189547605 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charles Goodhart, Ellen E. Meade

Bibliographic record

VenueLondon School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science) · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCorruption and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransparency (behavior)Political scienceLawSupreme courtEconomicsLaw and economicsBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Bank of Canada is the nation’s central bank. We are not a commercial bank and do not offer banking services to the public. Rather, we have responsibilities for Canada’s monetary policy, bank notes, financial system, and funds management. Our principal role, as defined in the Bank of Canada Act, is "to promote the economic and financial welfare of Canada."

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.089
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.089
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.013
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLondon School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science)Same topicCorruption and Economic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207