Bibliographic record
Abstract
A new paradigm has come to dominate social policy in Canada.1 As in many western nations, the understandings that underpinned the postwar welfare state have given way to new ideas about the social problems facing us in a global era and the appropriate responses to them. At its heart, this new paradigm represents a different conception of the sources of security in an insecure world. The fundamental purpose of the postwar social contract was security. The touchstone for the builders of the welfare state was the Depression of the 1930s, with its mass dislocation and widespread economic insecurity, and their aim was to protect citizens from what they saw as the universal risks associated with a market economy. A rapidly growing education system would expand equality of opportunity, and comprehensive health insurance would spread the benefits of health care to the population as a whole. And a full range of income transfer programs – unemployment insurance, workers ’ compensation, disability benefits, old age pensions, survivors ’ benefits, children’s allowances and social assistance – would protect citizens from the economic risks associated with life in a market economy. Fast forward to today. In contemporary policy circles, security no longer means protection from market disruptions. Such security as is available in the contemporary 1 This commentary summarizes a much longer and more fully documented analysis
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".