MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767351204

Harper's Legacy on Federalism: "Open Federalism" or Hidden Agenda?

2016· article· fr· W2767351204 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Julián Castro-Rea

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d'études constitutionnelles · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFederalismCooperative federalismCharterDual federalismPublic administrationNew FederalismGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceState (computer science)Open governmentPolitical economySociologyPoliticsLawOpen data
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the 2005 federal electoral campaign, Conservative leader Stephen Harper announced what he called a Charter of Open Federalism to guide relations between his future government and the provinces, offering to put an end to what he described as centralizing federalism. However, ten years later, once three consecutive Conservative governments had elapsed, the state ofintergovernmental relations in Canada was precarious. The Conservatives may have used the open federalism promise as a cover for a vast program of federal withdrawalfrom social policy, and centralization of economic and security policies. This doublespeak stressed relations with the provinces and minority nations to the point that the Liberal government formed in November 2015 has taken explicit distance from this legacy to reestablish healthy intergovernmental relations. Confirmation of this project is still a work in progress. The Liberals first year in office was crucial to assess whether continuity or change will prevail.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.028
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d'études constitutionnellesSame topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207