MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2502184426 · doi:10.29173/alr106

The Relationship Between Governments and Independent Regulatory Agencies: Will We Ever Get it Right?

2012· article· en· W2502184426 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Hudson Janisch

Bibliographic record

VenueAlberta Law Review · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRegulation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)University of TorontoUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsOpposition (politics)CommissionGovernment (linguistics)Context (archaeology)Political sciencePublic administrationGovernment regulationLawLaw and economicsEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the relationship that exists between governments and independent regulatory agencies. The article begins by reviewing this relationship within the context of the Usage Based Billing (UBB) debate that began after the Federal government, in opposition to a ruling by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), ordered the CRTC to go back and review its decision. After discussing the various arguments in favour of and against UBB, and discussing the policy concerns that exist with respect to government intervention in regulatory decisions, the article then provides a suggestion as to what should have occurred during the UBB debate. Next, the article looks at energy regulation at the provincial level, using Alberta and British Columbia as case studies. Finally, the article concludes with a discussion on potential regulatory structural reforms.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlberta Law ReviewSame topicRegulation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207