MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033826893

Speech on motion for concurrence in resolutions of Quebec conference, March 7th, 1888.

2014· article· en· W7033826893 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in Service Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriticismOpposition (politics)Tone (literature)WitnessScrutinyFraming (construction)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

is much to be regretted, that the hon.leader of the Opposition, in leading the criticism on the proposi- tions for the amendment of the Constitution, should have sought to impart into this debate a spirit of partisanship and acrimony, altogether out of place in the consideration of the question before the House.(Hear, hear.)I am glad to see that, with the exception of his second lieutenant, the hon.member for Toronto (or perhaps I am doing the hon.gentle- man an injustice.I perhaps ought to have said first lieutenant, as it looks as if the hon.member for North Grey had been deposed) -I say I am glad to see, that with the excep- tion of the hon.member for Toronto, the other Opposition speakers have had the good sense, to refuse to follow in the unworthy path of criticism marked out for them, and have endeavored to discuss the propositions in a logical and temperate manner.I think I may especially compliment the hon.member for East Durham as being the first to lead off in this much more appropriate manner of dealing with the subject.His speech, both in tone \ and argument, was much better than that of his leader.It may not have been so fluent or frothy, but it was more argumentative, and dealt with the proposed amendment in a manner more befitting the subject.I think I may extend the same compliment to that of the hon.member for Grenville, who, in the main, applied his criticisms in a business-like vay, befitting a deliberative body called upon to deal with a subject as grave and momencous as the amendment of our Constitution.The fact is, that the older members of the House are getting a little tired of this old loyalty speech of the hon.gentleman from London ; they have heard it almost verbatim et literatim, session after session.When first delivered, some eight or ten years ago, it was amusing and piquant, but after frequent repetitions it becomes stale and uninteresting.It is like witnessing a play when you have been a dozen times at the rehearsal. (Laughter.)You thoroughly know the plot.You know when the colored fire is to be introduced.You know when the particular studied and well-rehearsed attitude of raising the hands and bowing to the mimic company of rustics on the stage is assumed, it is the preconcerted signal for these rustics to throw up their paper hats, the village band to blare their trumpets, and the little boys to frantically beat their big and little drums.(Cheers

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)Same topicAI in Service InteractionsFrench-language works237,207