Ratio d’équité salariale et démocratie actionnariale au Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette étude examine la rhétorique des entreprises canadiennes ciblées par des actionnaires activistes pour convaincre l’ensemble des actionnaires de voter contre les projets de résolution déposés par des actionnaires minoritaires. Ces projets exigent la divulgation du ratio d’équité salariale au sein de leur entreprise. Les analyses réalisées sur une population de 39 résolutions soumises entre les années 2008 et 2020 inclusivement, montrent que les entreprises conseillent à leurs actionnaires lors de l’assemblée générale de voter contre ces projets de résolution en utilisant des stratégies rhétoriques de légitimation. Cette rhétorique semble prise en compte par l’assemblée générale puisque les votes « en faveur » de ces projets de résolution atteignent en moyenne seulement 7 %.
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 | 0.021 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".