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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the first part of the article, the author gives a brief theoretical view of the institution of the referendum and the development of constitutionalism in Canada, since its beginnings in the nineteenth century, through the federal crisis of the seventies of the twentieth century, to unsuccessful efforts to find a compromise between the province of Quebec and the rest of Canada. In the second part of the article discusses the legal framework of the institution of referendum and referendums that are held both at the federal level and the provinces of Canada. A referendum, as a way that enables the citizens to participate in decision-making important for them, has been used in Canada since the beginning of the twentieth century, but the peak occurred at the end of this century, by adopting extremely important decisions for the survival of the Canadian federation. If we look at federal and provincial levels of calling a referendum is disproportionate in favor of the provinces, because on the federal level referendum is only been called three times. So far any referendum that was held, was consultative, without the obligation to respect the results. But probably that the referendum results would be different in Quebec, the government of the province would certainly endeavored to comply with the will of the people and negotiate its sovereignty.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it