MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013800177 · doi:10.1163/156921011x605562

Canadian Policy Towards Bangladesh: How Does the North Look at the South?

2011· article· en· W2013800177 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zaglul Haider

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican and Asian Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Geopolitics and Ethnography
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommonwealthAllianceChinaAsian studiesNational interestPoliticsPolitical scienceForeign policyIndependence (probability theory)Economic growthDevelopment economicsCorporate governanceImmigrationEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The goal of the paper is to analyze the Canadian policy towards Bangladesh. In this paper I argue that Canadian approach towards Bangladesh was different in different phases of history. In the liberation war of Bangladesh Canada played a role that went against the interest of Bangladesh and suited with the triple alliance of the US-Pakistan and China. Against the backdrop of Cold War politics, Canadian policy demonstrated the reflection of her national interest. In the dawn of the independence of Bangladesh in the early 1970’s Canada revised its policy, immediately recognized the new nation and supported Bangladesh’s admission in to the Commonwealth, the United Nations and other international organizations. Since the threshold of Bangladesh’s journey Canada emerged as a development partner of the new nation. Apart from significant aid, Canada also provided immigration facilities to the Bangladeshis. All these are consistent with its national interest. I also focus on the Canadian concerns over the violation of human rights and poor governance that gradually eroded the image of Bangladesh among the Canadian policy makers. Finally, I suggest a way out to improve relations between the two countries of the ‘North’ and ‘South’.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.235 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican and Asian StudiesSame topicAsian Geopolitics and EthnographyFrench-language works237,207