Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages is an important element to Canada's national language policy implementation and development (available online at http://www.ocol_clo.gc.ca/html/index_e.php ). In 1963, when tensions between French and English Canada challenged the very future of its Federation (1867), the federal government launched the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism to investigate the realities of bilingualism in Canada and make recommendations to strengthen the confederation based on the principles of two equal founding peoples, the English and the French. The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages was created in 1969 as part of the first Official Languages Act adopted by the Canadian Parliament, based on the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism. The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages provides policy makers with a mechanism to oversee the implementation of and compliance with a far‐reaching language policy meant to bridge two divided linguistics groups, the Anglophones and the Francophones, and their respective minorities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.055 | 0.009 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".