Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through visits across the Circumpolar and other non-Arctic states, Canada's foreign affairs minister, Lawrence Cannon, embarked on an international crusade in recent years to promote Canada as an Power. With anticipated increased human activities throughout the Arctic, Ottawa's discourse for the region is locked in a traditional narrative shaped by a belief that it has to promote Canadian territorial integrity in its Far North. This approach certainly supports a very monolithic nationalistic view of Arctic geopolitics for Canadians. In an emerging new North with multiple actors and stakeholders (non-Arctic states, international organizations, Indigenous partners, tourism, fishing, traditional security concerns, and oil & gas exploration and investments), where is Canada going? This article looks at Canada's current foreign policy discourse when dealing with the Arctic. It argues that the policy objectives put forward under the Harper government produce a tous azimuts self-assertive foreign policy discourse driven by undefined and uncalculated strategic outcomes. Therefore, it is advanced that Canada's lack of vision on global Arctic affairs beyond its territory could potentially undermine Ottawa's credibility as a multilateralist.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".