MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033469673 · doi:10.1017/s0008423909990424

Worth the Wait: Determinants of Ministerial Appointment in Canada, 1935–2008

2009· article· en· W2033469673 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElectoral Systems and Political Participation
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentPolitical scienceHumanitiesPoliticsLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The subject of ministerial career paths is neglected in the Canadian political science canon. The existing literature, data and methods are for the most part descriptive and require updating. This article addresses this deficit by focusing on the topic of ministerial appointments in the Canadian federal parliament. An event history model is developed to estimate the “hazard” of ministerial appointment for all government party members of Parliament for the period 1935–2008. Existing theories and explanations for ministerial appointments and their relationship to constitutional conventions and political principles are systematically tested using a series of variables identified in the Canadian and comparative literature. The paper concludes with recommendations for further research and integration with complementary country-specific and comparative research programs in the field of ministerial career paths. Résumé. Le parcours de carrière ministérielle est un sujet négligé dans la convention de la science politique canadienne. La littérature, les données et les méthodes existantes sont majoritairement descriptives et requièrent une mise à jour. Cet article tente de combler cette lacune en étudiant les nominations ministérielles au gouvernement fédéral canadien. Un modèle de survie couvrant la période de 1935 à 2008 est mis au point afin d'évaluer le risque des nominations ministérielles pour tous les députés du parti politique au gouvernement. Les théories et interprétations actuellement utilisées pour déterminer les nominations ministérielles ainsi que leur affinité avec les conventions constitutionnelles et les préceptes politiques sont méthodiquement analysées à l'aide d'une suite de données reconnues dans la littérature canadienne et comparative. Finalement le document préconise la poursuite des recherches et un rapprochement avec les programmes de recherche comparatifs et propres au pays en matière de parcours de carrière ministérielle.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.799
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.289 · 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