MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984233868 · doi:10.7202/015962ar

Du lobbying pour la construction d’une infrastructure publique

2007· article· fr· W1984233868 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Éric Mauras

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d histoire de l Amérique française · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicTransport and Economic Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La notion de service public s’impose de plus en plus au Canada à partir du milieu du xixe siècle, notamment en ce qui concerne les infrastructures urbaines. Nous proposons ici une étude sur l’action d’un groupe de pression, les marchands de Québec, auprès du gouvernement fédéral dans le but d’installer un réseau télégraphique dans le golfe du Saint-Laurent. Ce projet, présenté par ses promoteurs comme un service public, prend forme à partir de 1875. Il vise, en améliorant la sécurité de la navigation dans le golfe, à favoriser la place du port de Québec comme plaque tournante du trafic commercial canadien. Cet article retrace les actions du groupe de pression en faveur de leur projet, la mise en place de ce dernier par le gouvernement ainsi qu’une analyse économique de son fonctionnement entre 1880 et 1895. Notre étude montre ainsi la distorsion existant entre l’efficacité pratiquement nulle du réseau télégraphique et l’image que s’en font les milieux d’affaires canadiens. Il s’agit d’un exemple rare d’une action de lobbying aux conséquences positives pour le Canada en général, mais négatives pour le groupe privé à l’origine du projet.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.010
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d histoire de l Amérique françaiseSame topicTransport and Economic PoliciesFrench-language works237,207