MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1652112160 · doi:10.7202/700943ar

Les contraintes du milieu et la gestion de la politique étrangère canadienne de 1976 à 1978

2005· article· en· W1652112160 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
John Kirton

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCabinet (room)Executive branchPolitical scienceForeign policyGovernment (linguistics)Public administrationROWEPoliticsManagementEconomicsGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The direction and pace of efforts to co-ordinate the foreign policy making process within the executive branch of middle-size states may depend on subtle but cumulatively important shiefs in domestic and external environments. The experience of the Canadian government from 1976 to 1978 suggests the effects which four types of environmental change can have. The approach of a federal election was accompanied by a reduced emphasis on the formal procedures of the structured cabinet committee System instituted in the early years of the first Trudeau government. An increased threat to national unity, as registered in the November 1976 election of a Parti Québécois majority provincial government, concentrated decisional activity at the very centre of government, and had only indirect effects on the formal foreign policy planning process. Concern with persistent economic dilemmas, registered most clearly in the imposition of an expenditure restraint programme in August 1978, directly increased the use of the budgetary process and prompted moves toward foreign service integration. And the intensification of a decline in tension in relations with the United States, and the accompanying emergence of new global problems, led, in turn, to a transfer of dynamic, creative co-ordinatively-oriented leadership into the Department of External Affairs, a reorganization of the Department, and a strong stress on re-orienting its role toward that of a modem central policy agency.

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)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0190.013
Scholarly communication0.0100.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207