MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416398201 · doi:10.64449/9781997468394-000

Synopsis

2025· book-chapter· en· W4416398201 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueUJ Press eBooks · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Politics and Representation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsCorporate governanceRepresentation (politics)Psychological interventionGender equalityParity (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The participation of women in governance plays a crucial role in fostering democratic, egalitarian, and sustainable societies (Agbalajobi, 2010; Simbine & Oyekanmi, 2025). Despite this, data consistently demonstrates that women’s representation in leadership positions across Africa remains below parity (Brookings, 2023; UN Women, 2025). While some countries, such as Rwanda, Kenya, and South Africa, have made notable strides in increasing female political representation, gender disparities persist across various economic and political sectors (IMF, 2023). This disparity exists notwithstanding the implementation of global, regional, and national policies aimed at promoting women’s rights and ensuring their equal participation in political and economic spheres). According to the 2021 report, Africa’s female political representation stands at just 24%, highlighting the ongoing need for targeted interventions (International IDEA, 2021). Factors such as entrenched patriarchy, lack of political will, and restrictive electoral frameworks continue to hinder progress towards gender parity in governance. Addressing these barriers requires concerted efforts from governments and development organisations to empower women and enhance their access to political leadership (Sadie, 2015).

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.896
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.259 · 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