MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117937151 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2009v34n3a2020

Communicating with (Some) Canadians: Communication Rights and Government Online in Canada

2009· article· en· W2117937151 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Michael Felczak, Richard Smith, Geoffrey Glass

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)The InternetPlan (archaeology)Internet privacyPublic relationsBusinessInternet accessPublic policySoftwareWorld Wide WebPolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A communication rights framework is used to evaluate recent government online initiatives in Canada. Through an analysis of policy documents, government websites, user experiences, and the existing and evolving computing environment, the authors argue that government online programs fail to adequately ensure the communication rights of Canadians who use free and open source software, including Canadians who seek alternatives to proprietary software, Canadians who require low-cost computing, and Canadians who access the Internet via public libraries and community centres that use free and open source software. Existing government programs also fail to ensure the communication rights of Canadians without access to the Internet, including Canadians who do not use or plan to use the Internet. The authors identify specific problem areas in the provision of government information, services, and consultations and suggest policy recommendations that address the identified shortcomings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CommunicationSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207