MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2992250328

Changing Times at the Canadian Parliamentary Review

2014· article· en· W2992250328 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Will Stos

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian parliamentary review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSection (typography)Political scienceDemocracyPublic administrationSociologyLaw and economicsLawPoliticsBusinessAdvertising
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The new editor of the Canadian Parliamentary Review introduces himself to readers in this article. He explains his approach to his new role and to the publication as being one which fosters discussion and debate about new ideas about parliamentary democracy while recognizing its distinguished past. Particular emphasis will be given to people and projects which seek to continue to make these institutions responsive and relevant to Canadians. A concluding section outlines some of the editorial board�s proposals for the Review during this time of transition and renewal.

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)0.084
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.210
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.914

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0840.210
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0190.020
Science and technology studies0.0120.008
Scholarly communication0.0220.007
Open science0.0070.003
Research integrity0.0130.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian parliamentary review→Same topicPolitical Systems and Governance→French-language works237,207→