MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7036042448

The Americanization of Third-Party Spending in Canadian Elections

2022· article· en· W7036042448 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychology Research and Bibliometrics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmericanizationRelation (database)Public spendingGovernment spendingFederal election
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past few years, Dr. de Clercy and Valere Gaspard have been conducting research on Canadian election spending following the introduction of new pre-election spending regulations for third parties in Canadian federal elections established in 2018, titled, Bill C-76. This summer, Valere spearheaded a research team that was aiming to produce a new study regarding the Americanization of third-party spending in Canada from 2000 onward. After conducting a review of relevant academic literature at the beginning of the summer, it became evident to us there is a lack of research on third-party spending in Canada, especially in relation to the United States. Therefore, this paper intends to identify trends in Canadian third-party spending that are similar to the spending habits of third parties in the United States.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.905

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.249 · 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