MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099596805

a), “Elections and participation: The meanings of turnout decline,” paper prepared for the annual general meeting of the Canadian

2003· article· en· W7099596805 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Finance and Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurnoutVotingContext (archaeology)PoliticsAppealGeneral electionCompetition (biology)Falling (accident)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is increasingly evident that the precipitous decline in voting turnout in the 2000 federal election to an historic low is rooted in social and political trends extending well beyond the specific context of that particular election. While there is a natural tendency to attribute the decline to the dominant position of the Liberals, the absence of meaningful party competition in many constituencies, or the lack of appeal of particular political leaders, there are many aspects of the decline which invite us to probe for deeper causes. The drop in turnout has been a prolonged one, falling in each of the last three federal elections – to 70 % in 1993, 67 % in 1997, and finally to 61 % in the 2000 election. Voting turnout has been similarly declining in many other industrialized countries. In the 2001 British election, it dropped even more sharply, to a level (59%) even lower than that observed in Canada. As is seen in table 1, declines of varying magnitude have occurred in many established democracies over the past two decades, with large

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient 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 score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIslamic Finance and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207