MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3166017549 · doi:10.29173/mlj1038

Fixed Date Elections

2008· article· en· W3166017549 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bryan G. Schwartz, Andrew R. Buck

Bibliographic record

VenueManitoba Law Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

lNmoDUCTIONF or most people, Friday afternoon signals the end of a five~day workweek.Computers are shut down for the weekend, voice mail is turned on, and office lights are shut off.Some workers even leave a little early to get a head~start on traffic.But 20 April 2007 was not just any Friday in Manitoba's political circles-unbeknownst to just about everyone except Premier Gary Doer and his closest advisors.That was the day Mr. Doer called Manitoba's 39 th general election, capitalizing on a longstanding rule that allows the governing party to unilaterally select an election date.Incumbent political parties hold a massive tactical advantage over their opponents in jurisdictions that allow the government to set its own election date.Unfortunately, as history shows, that advantage is frequently employed in a less~than .. altruistic manner.This has led several provinces and the federal government to remove the incumbent's power to arbitrarily set election dates.Questions about its constitutionality have been raised, but it is argued fixed date election legislation-which sets a maximum duration for Parliament, at the expiry of which an election will be held-is distinct from the sphere of power guaranteed to the Lieutenant Governor and Governor General.The law is constitutionally sound, and as a result Manitoba should move to adopt fixed date election legislation as a means of restoring a measure of fairness, transparency and improved governance to the electoral process. II.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManitoba Law JournalSame topicAfrican history and culture analysisFrench-language works237,207