Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The appearance or imminent arrival of a ‘new federalism’ has been a repeated theme in the study of federal-provincial relations in Canada and in the pronouncements of Canadian governments. At the same time, there clearly is a strong path dependency effect that acts as a check or limitation on the scope of change that federal governments can accomplish, leaving Canadian history littered with the corpses of ‘new federalisms’ that have never been realized. While there is much that separates recent scholarly interventions on the new federalism, all recognize the need to restore a greater measure of political legitimacy and functionality in federal-provincial relations by building consensus on rules and norms of behavior. This paper surveys the history of ‘the new federalism’ as a political strategy and program, and analyzes the competing interpretations of the concept that are currently on offer. I conclude that policy challenges looming on the horizon will demand a coordinated and multilevel response from governments, making it likely that whatever new federalism emerges will continue the trend toward shared jurisdiction and policy-making, rather than disentanglement.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it