MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392650786 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-4048616/v1

A new innovative method for evaluating monarchies (crowns): A cost‒benefit analysis via social and mass media in a commonwealth country

2024· preprint· en· W4392650786 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ehsan Jozaghi, Pouria Jozaghi

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommonwealth, Australian Politics and Federalism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommonwealthMonarchyMass mediaSocial mediaAdvertisingBusinessPolitical scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: In recent years, there has been opposition to the value of constitutional monarchies around the world. Some have argued that monarchies are no longer relevant in the 21st century. Others have argued that queens and kings are unelected and undemocratic and inadvertently symbolize past histories of colonialism. Methods: In this evaluation, using the social media coverage of the head of the commonwealth (“the royal family”) on YouTube and X (formerly Twitter) as a proxy for its popularity, the economic benefits of the royal household are estimated versus the cost using mathematical models. Moreover, newspaper discussions of the royal family in Canada via the Canadian Newsstream database are used in the cost‒benefit ratio of the model. Results: Based on conservative estimations, the cost-to-benefit ratio of the head of the commonwealth in Canada alone is 7.443 trillion:1. Based on the social media baseline estimates, on YouTube, there were 6,953 videos, which generated a total of 2.58 billion views. On X, there were 108,750 posts, 83.992 billion views, 32.610 million comments, 129.326 million reposts and 1.146 billion likes. In newspaper coverage in Canada since 1970, among the total articles, there were 1.868 million newspaper articles, 2,596 magazine articles, and 551,066 other articles, demonstrating the level of outreach in every Canadian household. The royal family, as the head of the commonwealth, has possibly reached billions worldwide as a positive force for the common good of humanity and generated a quadrillion dollars in direct and indirect economic benefits for global and local economies since the inception of faster modes of communications and transportation after WWII. Conclusion: The value that monarchies add to nations and the world as institutions is unparalleled. In some countries, the national unity of different nations/regions/lands/provinces/ territories, the fragile balance of confederations, and the constitution are directly linked to the continuity of the crown. It is recommended that countries that revolted or voted against the monarchy in the past (e.g., Iran and Greece) reinstate the institution. Countries that are currently governed by some form of monarchy should not only maintain these institutions due to their extreme cost-effectiveness, cost-benefits, intangible benefits, efficiency, and superiority to other governing systems but also establish the supreme council of a king and queen and their representatives to give greater voice and urgency to issues facing humanity. Trial registration: Not applicable

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.560
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicCommonwealth, Australian Politics and FederalismFrench-language works237,207