MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W140593061 · doi:10.1007/978-3-531-92139-6_4

“At the Mercy of a Putative Majority:” Difference as a ‘Problem’ in Canadian Political Theory

2009· book-chapter· en· W140593061 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Suzanne Gallant

Bibliographic record

VenueVS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticultural Socio-Legal Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMulticulturalismNormativeScholarshipPoliticsPolitical philosophyContext (archaeology)EpistemologyAccommodationPolitical scienceSociologySocial scienceEnvironmental ethicsPositive economicsGender studiesPolitical economyLawPhilosophyHistoryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper will critically examine the latent normative content of approaches to difference in political theory via their conceptions of community and culture. I argue that it is particularly important and interesting to do so in the context of ‘Canadian political theory,’ at least in respect to its dominant strand – here I have the pioneering work of Will Kymlicka, Charles Taylor and the wide landscape of their philosophical legacy in mind – because it is widely regarded as being at the leading edge of international scholarship on multiculturalism and accommodation of minorities in Western polities. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score0.521

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0200.057
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.284 · 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.

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften eBooksSame topicMulticultural Socio-Legal StudiesFrench-language works237,207