MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099293443 · doi:10.24124/c677/200826

Gendering Local Governing: Canadian and Comparative Lessons – The Case of Metropolitan Vancouver

2008· article· en· W2099293443 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 · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetropolitan areaLegislaturePoliticsGender equityPolitical scienceRepresentation (politics)Equity (law)Variety (cybernetics)State (computer science)Local governmentPublic administrationEconomic growthGeographyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The United Nations Special Advisor on Gender Issues and the Advancement of Women, Rachel Mayanja recently noted the slow progress toward gender equity in political representation in the world’s assemblies: while representation of women in national legislatures is up (now at 16.4% overall), there remain areas of slower progress, and the rate of change remains distinctly unhurried. Countries such as Canada offer a basis for some comparisons; so does comparing national, provincial/state/regional and local governments. What is posed here is some evidence from the Canadian case, with brief national comparisons with a variety of other countries. Central to this examination of Canada is a study, reported here, on women in local government in metropolitan Vancouver, providing lessons in terms of Canada and more generally.

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 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 score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.244 · 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