MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074525221 · doi:10.1017/s0008423909990916

Bilan des réformes électorales au Canada : Quelle place pour les femmes?

2010· article· fr· W2074525221 on OpenAlexaffabout
Manon Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Political Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesEconomic rentPoliticsLegislatureArtEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé. Ce texte examine les différents projets de réforme électorale proposés depuis le tournant du millénaire dans les provinces canadiennes et au Nunavut, et ce, avec le souci de mettre au jour la place qu'ils aménagèrent à l'objectif d'accentuer la féminisation des assemblées législatives. L'idée maîtresse qui l'inspire veut que les propositions réformatrices aient réservé une importance le plus souvent nulle, bien que parfois accessoire, mais jamais centrale, à cette question. Pourtant, le Québec, et surtout le territoire du Nunavut, se démarquent par l'attention qu'ils portèrent au problème de l'effacement des femmes de la scène politique et leurs propositions de réforme ont offert des réponses plus à même de le solutionner. Abstract. This essay examines the different electoral reform projects proposed since the turn of the millennium in Canadian provinces and the territory of Nunavut, in order to reveal what accommodation they have made to the objective of increasing the feminization of legislative assemblies. My guiding idea is that most reform proposals have given no, or sometimes peripheral, emphasis to this question but have never made it a central issue. However, Quebec and, even more, Nunavut stand out for the attention that they have paid to the absence of women from the political scene, and their reform proposals have included responses that might offer a solution.

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 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.821
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.271 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Political ScienceSame topicGender Politics and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207