Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sophistication and dissemination of communications and research technology, and the competitive pressures to reflect the needs and wants of the electoral market, are changing Canadian democracy.Although the application of business marketing principles and techniques to politics is nothing new, the progressive complexity of those strategies and tactics is significantly changing how political actors behave.At one time, it was good enough to simply offer a commercial product or service, or to declare oneself a candidate for election, with little need to communicate because sufficient demand already existed in the marketplace.But competition brings pressures to edge out rivals, necessitating product differentiation, salesmanship, mass communication, and perhaps hyperbole.Some products and services find niche markets, as do political parties and politicians, and intentionally differentiate themselves from the demands of the mass market -think of high-end or community-oriented coffee shops or, in Canadian politics, the Bloc Québécois.Those seeking to attract the custom of the plurality or majority of the mass market, and hoping to remain or become market leaders, nowadays must rigorously research the marketplace, understand consumers' preferences, and attempt to appropriately shape the image and market positioning of themselves and their competitors -think of Tim Hortons and Starbucks, and of the Conservative and Liberal Parties.Some organizations, such as the myriad second-tier franchised coffee shops or the New Democratic Party, are market followers given that they successfully service a smaller but loyal customer base.In the consumer marketplace, there are, of course, always alternatives, such as brewing coffee at home or not drinking it at all, just as in politics there are alternatives, such as getting involved with interest groups or choosing not to follow politics and not voting.Moreover, just as consumers' preferences are subject to change, so are electors' -most recently with the 2011 election, when support for the Liberal Party ......
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.637 | 0.460 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".