MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412902133 · doi:10.56367/oag-047-12125

Democracy: From polarization to common ground

2025· article· en· W4412902133 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access Government · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommon groundDemocracyPolitical scienceDirect democracyPolarization (electrochemistry)SociologyLawChemistryPoliticsCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Democracy: From polarization to common ground Jared Wesley, PhD, discusses how the Common Ground team at the University of Alberta helps individuals renew their commitment to decency and respect within democracies. This conversation addresses issues concerning political polarization and research on populism. Several liberal democracies appear caught in a negative feedback loop, as political polarization and democratic backsliding reinforce and accelerate each other. To break the vicious cycle, we need to reinvest in pluralism – the belief that a healthy society thrives not by marginalizing our opponents, but by honouring and incorporating a diversity of perspectives into our democratic processes. Our Common Ground team at the University of Alberta is helping people renew that basic commitment to decency and respect in our democracies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.690
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.330 · 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