Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Just days after the terrorist attacks of n September 2001, President George W. Bush gave one of the most important speeches of his presidency before a joint session of congress, reshaping the trajectory of American foreign policy. Seated in the upper deck of the house of representatives was British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who had flown across the Atlantic just to attend. Bush declared, no truer friend than Great Britain. Once again, we are joined together in a great cause.Cue the hand-wringing in Canada. Suddenly, the decades of shared history that spawned the amorous cliches of thousands of speeches had been turned on their head. What had become of Canada's with America? Canadians, after aU, had taken in thousands of passengers stranded when American airspace was closed on 9/11. What happened to being each other's best customer? What about aU those trucks that cross the Ambassador Bridge? Don't we share the world's longest undefended border? What about the peaceful coexistence between elephants and mice?Doubts about the strength of the ties that bind Canada and the United States together have multiplied in recent years. Former US Ambassador to Canada Paul Cellucci's infamous quip that trumps or the cancellation of official visits to Ottawa by Bush in 2003 and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice in 2005, reportedly over Canada's decision to stay out of Iraq and ballistic missile defence, respectively, left a chill on bilateral relations.North America, and Canada-US relations more narrowly, have not suffered from inattention in the last decade. However, the policy focus has been heavily dominated by a Faustian bargain between security and economics that has become more entrenched since President Barack Obama assumed office in 2009. Coupled with recent efforts by Obama and Britain's David Cameron to redefine the US-UK relationship as an essential one, many are left wondering whether there was ever anything special about CanadaUS relations. American officials openly praise the contribution and sacrificed being made by Canadians in Afghanistan, one could be forgiven for suspecting that the US talking points might actually read insert NATO ally here.In 1984, Charles Doran argued that Canada-U S relations were at a similar set of crossroads. Structural asymmetries, divergent interests, and both strategic and tactical missteps by Ottawa and Washington risked undermining the postwar comity and cooperation between the two countries. Through the 1970s, Canada and the United States had moved along divergent paths, abandoning many elements of cooperation, institution-building, deference, exceptionalism, and exemptionalism that had until then characterized Canada- U S relations. Such was the uncertain state of bilateral relations in the period that Ronald Reagan's ambitious call for a accord in 1979 seemed wildly out of step. Reagan's ascendancy to the White House dramatically reasserted America's role as leader and underwriter of a liberal global economic system. At the same time, Canada struggled to find its place in the world, trapped between the economic nationalism of initiatives like the national energy program and its dependence on an open global economy for its economic survival. It was a crossroads for the relationship, indeed.Yet only a year after publication of Forgotten Partnership: CanadaUS Relations Today, as Reagan and Prime Minister Mulroney sang When Irish eyes are smiling together in Quebec City, one might have concluded that Doran's assessment of the state of Canada-US relations was overly pessimistic.1 The two leaders had just committed to negotiating a comprehensive free trade agreement, two thirds of the continental accord, which seemingly heralded the renewal of partnership. The dramatic reversal of Canada's economic posture in response to Reagan's chaUenge had set the two countries on a course for a dramatic deepening of the relationship through economic ties. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,030 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,017 | 0,013 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,015 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,020 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,144 | 0,081 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».