MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1935040976 · doi:10.24124/c677/2013328

Intra-Party Federalism and the Impact of the Provincial Parties on 'Uniting the Right'

2013· article· en· W1935040976 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Political Science Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAllianceIdeologyFederalismPolitical sciencePolitical economyNew RightMovement (music)PoliticsPower (physics)Public administrationRadical rightLawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the role played by the Ontar- io and Alberta Progressive Conservative Parties in the movement to ‘unite the Right’ in Canada in the late 1990s and early 2000s. This movement sought to unify the Re- form/Canadian Alliance and the federal Progressive Con- servative party, who all suffered from frequent electoral losses as a result of vote-splitting on the right of the political spectrum. This movement resulted in the creation of the Conservative Party of Canada in 2003. The ‘unite the right’ movement was greatly aided by the power and influence of provincial Progressive Conservative parties, especially in Ontario and Alberta. The paper explores the various strate- gic and pragmatic concerns of the provincial wings, and details the balancing of ideology, partisanship, and electoral success.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.265 · 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