MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2482481634 · doi:10.1057/9780230248656_3

Regulating Campaign Finance in Canadian Referendums and Initiatives

2010· book-chapter· en· W2482481634 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard Johnston

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferendumCampaign financePolitical scienceDemocracyPublic administrationDirect democracyPolitical economyEconomicsLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The regulation of money in Canadian referendums is distinguished mainly by its absence. But then, the same might be said of money itself, although it is obviously hard to tell. Although Canada hardly seems like a major player on the world referendum stage, a surprising number have been conducted by senior governments (national and provincial) and hundreds more populate the municipal landscape. As in the USA, direct democracy in Canada has come in waves. Regulators missed the first wave entirely. The second wave, starting in the 1990s, has received some regulatory attention but only in one place, Quebec, is this attention is anything but perfunctory.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207