Increasing Canada's Foreign Intelligence Capability: Is it a Dead Issue?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the fact that the issue of whether Canada should develop a greater foreign intelligence capability has been broached numerous times, in various guises, over more than a century, those who have followed the development of the country's intelligence architecture will know it has never had a foreign intelligence service like its close allies. They will also be aware that on each occasion on which the issue has been raised, the Canadian government has declined to proceed. If history is any guide, there is a strong likelihood that the idea of Canada developing a more robust capability will again engage politicians, former intelligence officials, academics, the media, and think tanks in the not too distant future. The view adopted in this paper is that the public discourse has become sterile, and that if it is to advance, aspects of the counterfactual case – why has a foreign Humint capability not been developed? – may prove more fruitful.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it