MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023803079 · doi:10.1017/s0008423905269998

Micropolitics and Canadian Business: Paper, Steel and the Airlines

2005· article· en· W2023803079 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew Stritch

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabor Movements and Unions
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsScarcityBusiness historyField (mathematics)SubtitleVariety (cybernetics)Work (physics)Industrial relationsManagementPolitical scienceEngineeringEconomyEconomicsMarket economyLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Micropolitics and Canadian Business: Paper, Steel and the Airlines, Peter Clancy, Peterborough: Broadview, 2004, pp. 336. Given the scarcity of work on business-government relations in Canada any new academic monograph in this field is certainly welcome. Yet, even if the field were crowded, Peter Clancy's wide-ranging and multi-layered study would be a useful addition to the literature. As the subtitle indicates, the book is essentially a study of three important Canadian industries chosen from different economic sectors. For each of these it examines the character of industry politics across a variety of dimensions with a substantial emphasis on internal structure and historical development. It deals both with business-government interaction in the process of policymaking and with the nature of industrial policy outputs in a way that is sensitive to the complex and heterogeneous forces operating within each industry.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.665

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0130.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Political ScienceSame topicLabor Movements and UnionsFrench-language works237,207