MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755183956 · doi:10.1016/s0185-1918(17)30039-9

Estrategias electorales de la izquierda canadiense en un sistema que favorece al bipartidismo

2017· article· es· W2755183956 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales · 2017
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Theory and Democracy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormativeIdeologyPoliticsPolitical sciencePower (physics)DemocracyPolitical systemPolitical economyHumanitiesSociologyLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to analyze the origin, developmentand strategies of the Canadian party-based left and its evolution as a political group to compete in federal elections. From its beginnings in the 1930s, the left as an organized movement of parties has had to adapt to a political system of British origin favoring a two-party system of liberals and conservatives. This condition reinforces our hypothesis and findings that the Canadian political system favors bipartisanship (liberal/conservative) excluding other parties to gain access to power, which constitutes a paradox of democracy. Consequently, finding and extending new bases of support and redesigning ideological principles around normative documents, are all elements that lend support to this political option in each electoral process.

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.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.343 · 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