MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078225645 · doi:10.1080/11926422.2014.977311

Political demography of Canada–United States co-dependence: defence and security

2014· article· en· W2078225645 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christian Leuprecht

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Foreign Policy Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical sciencePoliticsNational securityInternational securityContext (archaeology)Political economySecurity interestDevelopment economicsPublic administrationGeographySociologyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although widely ignored by political scientists and scholars of international relations alike, historically unprecedented demographic change is arguably the most powerful force to affect national security and international stability over the coming decades. Fertility, mortality and migration are the one set of variables in the social sciences that can be projected into the more distant future with a reasonable degree of accuracy. As a result, the structural constraints and possibilities of demographic trends provide traction in anticipating future developments. This article examines the evolution of Canada - United States defence and security relations. It turns out that demographic trends among allied countries are bolstering Canada's value as a U.S. ally in both a bilateral and a multilateral context. In fact, demographic trends imply that Ottawa will be able to expand ability to punch above its weight in Washington, thus making Canada and the United States even more co-dependent in asserting their defence and security interests.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Foreign Policy JournalSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207