MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966224813 · doi:10.3828/bjcs.19.1.7

Enhancing Cooperation between India and Canada in the Era of Globalisation and Deregulation

2006· article· en· W1966224813 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sahadeo Basdeo

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Canadian Studies · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeregulationGlobalizationPolitical scienceInternational tradeEconomic geographyBusinessDevelopment economicsEconomyGeographyMarket economyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

India and Canada have maintained a dynamic and evolving relationship since India's independence. While relations had cooled off considerably following India's nuclear detonation in 1974, the year 1992 marked a turning point in the bilateral relationship. With the forces of globalisation rendering India's economic policies ineffective on the world stage, and domestic crises destroying confidence within the sub-continent, Narasimha Rao's administration embarked on a radical transformation of India's economy. India's liberalisation of its economy, which began in the early 1990s under the direction of Manmohan Singh, led to Canada's re-engaging with the subcontinent as never before. Largely economic in nature, the renewed relationship was marked by significant increases in trade, business and investment interactions, enhanced by cooperation in other areas. The last decade of the twentieth century also witnessed an increase in immigration and in cooperation in security issues and social affairs. More recently, it has been recognised that cooperation in science and technology holds great potential for mutual benefit and is already deepening the bilateral relationship. The nature of the re-engagement policy and the subsequent direction of the Indo-Canadian relationship demonstrate that, despite the nuclear detonations in 1974 and 1998, the bilateral relationship is poised for better times.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Canadian StudiesSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207