MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319668209 · doi:10.1093/pa/gsw008

Presence and Purpose in the Canadian House of Commons: The Standing Committee on the Status of Women

2016· article· en· W2319668209 on OpenAlex
Joan Grace

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

VenueParliamentary Affairs · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScrutinyHouse of CommonsGovernment (linguistics)CommonsGender mainstreamingPerspective (graphical)Political sciencePublic administrationSociologyMainstreamingGender studiesWork (physics)LawGender equalityPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, the Standing Committee on the Status of Women (SCSW) was established in the House of Commons in 2004 to report on relevant issues on the status of women. Adopting a feminist-institutional perspective, this article explores three dimensions of the work of the SCSW over the period 2004–2015: analysis and research, executive scrutiny and the participation of women's groups. The findings suggest that while the Committee contributed a gender presence and feminist voice, its inability to compel the government to act on recommendations rendered it a policy advocate rather than a catalyst for institutional innovation and gender mainstreaming.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.250 · 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