Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines women’s political representation in Canada. The proportion of women in the House of Commons(22%) remains below critical mass. The number of women elected in the 2000 and 2004 federal election raises slightly after 1990s. It seems that women have hit a glass ceiling in Canadian politics at least in the House of commons and that to break through it, special measures will have to bo taken. Nonetheless, Canada ranked higher level in the world for representation of women in its national parliament compared to other countries with SMD electoral system. As well known, it is very difficult for women to be elected under the single member district system. It is also very difficult to change electoral system itself to solve women’s political representation. Thus, without change in electoral system, women’s groups in Canada have made efforts in decades by the feminist movement to mobilize more women to enter decision-making bodies. In addition, they involved in the party and began to mobilize to challenge the party’s leadership on issues of importance to women. This mobilization led to calls for changes in party rules and policy. including more women as candidates, support for the movement’s policy agenda, and representational guarantees for women within the party. In fact, these activities essentially have a twofold purpose based on different but related conceptions of political representation: to increase the number of women in politics, and to ensure better representation of women’s demands, needs, and interests.
Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.
How this classification was reachedexpand
The three-model screen
all 5,600 screened works →All three models called this out of scope.
Political science study of women's representation in Canada's Parliament; the Canadian political system, not the research system.
It studies women's political representation in Canada, not the Canadian research system.
Political science study of women’s representation in the Canadian parliament, not the Canadian research system.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".