Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract.This paper examines the existence of sub-State political cultures in Canada. In so doing it revisits research conducted by Richard Simeon and David Elkins into the existence of provincial political cultures in Canada. It reviews the evidence for provincial political cultures and examines recent data from the Canadian Election Study in an effort to determine whether attitudes towards government have changed. Second, it revisits the process by which sub-cultures are identified. Using data from the federal election profiles and the CES the paper identifies nine distinct regional variant cultures within Canada. These regional cultures possess different political attitudes and behaviours that cannot be explained by the existence of provincial boundaries. Résumé.Cet article examine l'existence de cultures politiques sous-étatiques au Canada. Il reprend, ce faisant, les recherches de Richard Simeon et David Elkins qui démontrent la réalité des cultures politiques provinciales au Canada. L'article reconsidère l'authenticité de l'existence des cultures provinciales et étudie les données récentes de l'Étude électorale canadienne pour tenter de déterminer si les attitudes politiques ont changé. Ensuite, il réexamine le processus d'identification des sous cultures . En utilisant les profils des circonscriptions fédérales et l'ÉÉC, l'article identifie neuf variantes régionales distinctes au Canada. Ces cultures régionales manifestent des attitudes et comportement distincts qui ne peuvent pas s'expliquer par l'existence des frontières provinciales.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".