Policing Proliferation: On Militarization and Atomic Energy Canada Limited's Nuclear Response Forces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes the militarization of security and police forces occurring in Canada vis-à-vis regulation of the nuclear industry. Based on analysis of access to information requests, we investigate the operations of Nuclear Response Forces (NRFs) on nuclear sites in Canada, including the structural features of these NRFs, and their connections to local as well as national security and policing agencies. Our research explores the post–11 September 2001 impact of “design basis threat” assessment and counterterrorism policy on policing operations. Design basis threat assessment organizes security and policing practices according to adversarial models of military operation. We argue that the literature concerning militarization of policing must be extended to account for how the coordination of private and public security agencies as well as intelligence agencies at critical infrastructure sites facilitates the distribution of military technology and strategy across numerous scales of policing. Commenting on how militarization of security vis-à-vis nuclear proliferation in Canada is affecting some rural police forces, we contend that the design basis threat model of counterterrorism is transforming the strategy and operations of some local police forces working in jurisdictions near nuclear sites.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".