Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the conditions of production for Canadian policy in development and. Traditionally, analysis of Canadian aid has followed either a pluralistic, statist or neo-marxist theoretical approach. Noting the inadequacy of these forms of explanation, the author proposes an interpretation of Canadian aid based on the concept of « international community. » This concept can be defined as being the totality of decision-making principles, norms, rules and procedures that structure the expectations and behaviours of those involved in areas dealing with international relations. By resorting to this notion of international community, this study intends to demonstrate that the conditions of production for Canadian aid encompass two kinds of determinism. First, on the systemic level Canadian policy can be perceived as the result of external pressures to put in place an international aid community that contributes to regulating North-South relations. Second, on the national level Canadian aid can be seen as the product of internal power relationships which translate into pressures on the State to modify its participation in the international aid community so as to ensure the promotion of specific political interests.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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".