MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2729743504 · doi:10.1080/07078552.2017.1342990

The Contested Origins of Canadian Democracy

2017· article· en· W2729743504 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Dennis Pilon

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Political Economy · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyDemocratizationOrder (exchange)PoliticsPolitical economyLiberal democracyGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceProduct (mathematics)Property rightsSociologyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article takes up the debate about Canadian democratization, arguing that Canada was not democratic in 1867 and that the various electoral reforms pursued throughout the late nineteenth century were not part of a democratic agenda. Instead, they were the product of competing political elites seeking to stabilize an emerging liberal order—a form of government responsive to the economically privileged—and to do so in a way that would favour their political party. Previous scholars have mischaracterized the creation of this liberal order as a democratic one, either by assuming that democracy was established in 1867, or mistaking what were essentially struggles over property rights for democratic rights. This has led to a misunderstanding of the factors that have contributed to establishing and reproducing Canada’s limited democracy.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0290.026
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Political EconomySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207