Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book originated from discussions among like-minded scholars who study political elites in Canada and who have noticed change.It was agreed that there is a need for a cohesive forum for new research in this area.The fresh angle?Authors would examine ways that Canadian elites are evolving, or not, as political institutions and political actors adjust to a digital age.It is a political environment characterized by profound societal implications brought about by innovations in communications and information technology.Political Elites in Canada: Power and Influence in Instantaneous Times is the fourth book in an edited series.Political Marketing in Canada (UBC Press, 2012) looked at how political elites are using marketing strategies and tactics to shape their interactions with electors.Political Communication in Canada: Meet the Press and Tweet the Rest (UBC Press, 2014) examined how political elites are using different forms of mediated communication to reach Canadians.Then Permanent Campaigning in Canada (UBC Press, 2017) considered how political elites are leveraging available public resources to fund a constant state of electioneering.These books appear in the UBC Press series Communication, Strategy, and Politics, dedicated to the publication of innovative scholarly work that investigates the intricate relations among marketing strategy, the media, and political actors, with an emphasis on explaining the implications for Canadian democracy.The editors wish to thank Susan Delacourt for authoring the foreword.She ranks among the most respected veterans of political journalism in Canada.The author of a number of books herself, including the influential Shopping for Votes: How Politicians Choose Us and We Choose Them (Douglas and McIntyre, 2013), and a chapter contributor to Political Com munication in Canada, she is a big supporter of this series and its community of researchers.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".