MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118279487 · doi:10.26443/jcreor.v2i1.35

Divestment and Democracy at a Canadian University

2020· article· en· W3118279487 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Gregory M. Mikkelson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Council for Research on Religion · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConnaught FundUniversity of TorontoGovernment of CanadaFaculty of Engineering, McGill University
KeywordsDivestmentEndowmentDemocracyParallelsAction (physics)Political sciencePublic relationsManagementSociologyEconomicsLawPoliticsOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The campaign to divest the endowment of McGill University from fossil fuel has had amazing success in using scientific knowledge to inspire democratic action. Organizations collectively representing all students and academic staff, and most non-academic staff, have voted overwhelmingly in favor of divestment. There is one small problem, however. Unlike Oxford or Cambridge, where a majority vote among all faculty would be the final word about any and all university policy, McGill suffers rule by a plutocratic Board of Governors. This impairment parallels and connects with the stranglehold the fossil fuel industry has on Canadian environmental policy.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.530
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.207
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.123 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Council for Research on ReligionSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207