MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1591763977 · doi:10.1080/00083968.2010.9707574

Just West of Neutral: Canadian "Objectivity" and Peacekeeping during the Congo Crisis, 1960-61

2009· article· en· W1591763977 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Kevin Spooner

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africaines · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicVietnamese History and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeacekeepingCold warNorth Atlantic TreatyPolitical scienceForeign policyGovernment (linguistics)Development economicsTreatyObjectivity (philosophy)Political economyLawPoliticsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article assesses the significance of Canada's role in the Opération des Nations Unies au Congo (ONUC) and, more generally, Canada's foreign policy during the early months of the Congo crisis. It argues that Prime Minister John Diefenbaker's government pursued a policy that recognized the importance of achieving Western objectives in the Congo but at the same time eschewed the strident Cold War views of some North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies. The Canadian government was forced to weigh the importance of sometimes-conflicting foreign policy considerations when developing policy during the Congo crisis, and this ultimately lead to an unwillingness to be seen to be pursuing a concerted NATO approach to the Congo's tribulations. This would suggest recent interpretations that portray Canadian participation in ONUC as an example of how Canada's peacekeeping policy primarily served Western, Cold War objectives might not be entirely correct.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0240.018
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations13
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of African Studies / Revue canadienne des études africainesSame topicVietnamese History and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207