MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141436008 · doi:10.1017/s0008423905040151

The Challenge of Municipal Voting: Vancouver 2002

2005· article· fr· W2141436008 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 · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicElectoral Systems and Political Participation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocale (computer software)VotingPolitical scienceContext (archaeology)Welfare economicsHumanitiesGeographyPoliticsEconomicsLawPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. As compared with federal and provincial elections, municipal elections in Canada present voters with challenges of informational quantity and quality. These unique challenges have implications for the psychological structure of citizens' voting calculus. Using a survey of voters conducted after the city of Vancouver civic election of 2002, we estimate a model of vote choice for mayor. We show that voters respond to the different context in predictable ways: their choices are determined largely by ideological orientations and provincial partisanship, with local economic evaluations and local issues playing only a very small role. Résumé. Si on les compare aux élections fédérales et provinciales, les élections municipales au Canada posent, pour les électeurs, des problèmes d'accès à une information de qualité en quantité suffisante. Ces défis particuliers ont un impact sur la structure psychologique de leurs stratégies de vote. Nous estimerons ici un modèle de choix d'un candidat au poste de maire à l'aide des données d'un sondage effectué après les élections municipales de Vancouver de 2002. Nous démontrerons que les électeurs répondent à ce contexte différent de manière prévisible : leurs choix sont déterminés principalement par leur orientation idéologique et leur soutien partisan au niveau provincial, alors que l'évaluation de l'état de l'économie locale et les questions de politique locale ne jouent qu'un rôle limité.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.283 · 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