MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2299663598 · doi:10.21991/c9m95j

Confidence: How Much is Enough?

2011· article· en· W2299663598 on OpenAlex
Peter Neary

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueConstitutional Forum / Forum constitutionnel · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommonwealth, Australian Politics and Federalism
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParliamentHouse of CommonsConstitutionPrime ministerGovernment (linguistics)LawPolitical scienceGovernorSubject (documents)Subject matterRank (graph theory)PoliticsPhilosophyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Did Prime Minister Stephen Harper, faced with almost certain defeat in the Commons in December 2008 on a matter of confidence, act unconstitutionally by seeking to prorogue a newly elected parliament that had been sitting for only two weeks? And did Governor General Michaëlle Jean violate the principles of responsible government by granting prorogation? These questions have been the subject of intense debate in the Canadian media and may rank with the King-Byng crisis of 1926 in future academic and legal discussion of the constitution. In my opinion, while the prime minister tested the limits of “responsible government,” the Governor General respected precedent and acted appropriately and wisely in her decision.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.011
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.225 · 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