Invisible and Inaudible in Washington: American Policies toward Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How does the United States view Canada? As a country too unimportant to deserve any defined policy, or one that is to be used simply to complement the U.S. mission in the world? This book investigates the gap between Canadian perceptions of American policy toward Canada and actual U.S. policy. Edelgard Mahant and Graeme Mount examine details of White House policy from 1945 to the 1980s to assess the extent to which the United States could be said to have had a Canada policy. They analyze Canada's role in American foreign policy during the crisis days of the Cold War, and they also discuss economic issues, such as natural resources, trade, and investment. This book takes on and undermines widely held views of American policies toward Canada. It challenges the popular nationalist view that Canada has been treated as peripheral and dependent, but it also counters the opposing view that Washington has respected Canadian advice and benefitted from it. Instead, it argues that for the most part Canada has mattered little in Washington and that America's Canada policy is largely an ad hoc affair. Invisible and Inaudible in Washington offers penetrating new perspectives on American-Canadian relations -- a topic about which many Canadians thought there was little more to say and about which many Americans have scarcely thought at all.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".