MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2475523215

Funding of Canadian Provinces, Mechanisms and Solidarity

2014· article· en· W2475523215 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julien Vandernoot

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in management and applied economics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolidarityRevenueState (computer science)Political scienceSocial solidarityEconomic growthGeographyDevelopment economicsEconomicsSociologyLawSocial scienceFinancePolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is a federal state made up of thirteen entities, ten Provinces and three Territories. This article focuses on the funding mechanisms of the ten Provinces which induce solidarity in favor of some of them. The aim of this article is thus to describe the funding mechanisms of the Canadian Provinces and to measure the solidarity, based on the rules and formula provided by the Canadian law and on calculations for the year 2009-2010. This article underlines the redistributive character of the Canadian system and reveals in some cases a paradox of revenues, leading some poor provinces becoming wealthier than others which were initially wealthier.

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 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.954

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in management and applied economicsSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207