MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519852365 · doi:10.3138/cart.51.3.3288

Interactive Map to Illustrate Seat Distributions of Political Party Support Levels: A Web GIS Application

2016· article· en· W2519852365 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Yifei Chen, Andrea M. L. Perrella

Bibliographic record

VenueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJavaScriptComputer sciencePoliticsPublic opinionSoftwareWorld Wide WebKey (lock)DatabasePolitical scienceComputer securityLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada's new electoral order of 338 districts, updated in October 2013, was in effect for the October 2015 federal election. A Web GIS application was developed using the new electoral map to display seat projections generated by the Laurier Institute for the Study of Public Opinion and Policy (LISPOP). Seat projections convert, or “project,” public opinion support for the major political parties into a distribution of electoral seats for each party, based on a detailed analysis of an aggregation of polls. The map was published through ArcGIS Server, and coding language HTML and JavaScript implemented the required functions. Two key interactive features of the map include: (1) pop-up windows that provide the 2011 election result and LISPOP's current seat projection when hovering over a constituency; and (2) a drop-down menu that direct users to a desired region. The use of ArcGIS software enables fast and effective updates before and during the election.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCartographica The International Journal for Geographic Information and GeovisualizationSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207