MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7052200759

Political Influence Efforts in the US Through Campaign Contributions and Lobbying Expenditures: An Index Approach

2021· report· en· W7052200759 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

VenueIssue Lab (Candid) · 2021
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasma Diagnostics and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsIndex (typography)Value (mathematics)AutocracyPublic sectorPublic policyRelative value
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efforts by private-sector entities, nongovernment organizations, and other interest groups to exert political influence are pervasive in American politics, as they are in Australia, Canada, France, the United Kingdom, and other high-income democracies. Such efforts are also found in more autocratic societies such as China and Russia. However, legalized forms of political influence such as campaign contributions and lobbying efforts are more widespread in well-established democracies such as the United States.Importantly, efforts to influence political and administrative decisions can be good or bad, but either way, understanding the extent to which individual sectors of the economy engage in efforts to affect policy and regulatory initiatives is of interest. In this report, using publicly available information on federal campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures associated with individual sectors of the economy, we construct a set of political influence effort indexes for 60 sectors of the United States economy.The indexes are estimated using publicly available data, compiled by OpenSecrets from public sources, on federal campaign contributions and expenditures on lobbying efforts, divided by each sector's gross value of output, for each year from 2003 to 2020. Thus, for each sector in each year, we obtain an estimate of the dollars spent on political influence efforts at the federal level per million dollars of sector gross output. Index values are obtained by dividing each sector's outlays by average outlays per million dollars of output among the entire 60 sectors (that is, total spending on campaign contributions and lobbying divided by total output for all 60 sectors). An index value of one for a given sector indicates that the sector's efforts to exert political influence through lobbying and campaign contributions are representative of economy-wide efforts. A value of two indicates that a sector is investing twice as much as the average amount among all industries; an index value of 0.5 indicates the sector's expenditures are half the average amount

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.275 · 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