MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116457888

The Rise of the Liquor Control Board of Ontario: 1985-2009

2010· article· en· W2116457888 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ann Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Political Science Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsCampion CollegeUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)InstitutionMarket economyPurchasing powerValue (mathematics)Economic interventionismPoliticsEconomicsOligopolyControl (management)BusinessEphemeral keyIntervention (counseling)Political economyPolitical scienceLawManagement
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO) has undergone a remarkable transformation over the last twenty years. Once a decrepit and inefficient retailer, it is now regarded as a leader in its field. It provides a high level of consumer value to Ontario’s citizens and, most interestingly, has sought to reshape their preferences with regards to consuming and purchasing alcoholic products. Such a dramatic institutional shift was the result of externally imposed expectations, as well as internally generated institutional variables. The political power of other retailers and alcohol suppliers in Ontario’s oligopolistic liquor retail market, certain fundamental organizational changes that occurred to the LCBO, as well as more ephemeral variables such as Ontario’s conservative culture, and long history of government intervention in its economy and the agricultural sector, help to explain the actions of Mike Harris’ Conservative government with respect to this institution. Such an interesting policy outcome in the Ontario liquor market complicates arguments made by some that government enterprises are unable to provide high value services to citizens, as well as the arguments of those who see privatization of public assets as a key characteristic of neoliberal-type reforms.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.006
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Political Science ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207