Beyond Parochialism and Domestic Preoccupation: The Current State of Comparative Politics in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The response of the comparativists to Canadian scholars' call to build Canadian politics into our comparative framework has to be first, that we, the comparativists engage in a broader dialogue about our sub-discipline and move away from our self-imposed parochialism with respect to the scope and objectives of our research, our methods of theory generation and of empirical analysis. Our house is a divided, fragmented house. Having said this, we do have a fertile ground and share a common conducive infrastructure, methodological and thematic, across the two sub-disciplines to start our engagement with the Canadianists. Résumé. Notre réponse, de nous qui faisons la politique comparée, à cet appel que nous lancent les canadianistes, soit d'incorporer dans notre grille comparative des elements de politique canadienne, doit se consister tout d'abord en ce que nous nous engagions dans un dialogue élargi portant sur notre sous-discipline et à renoncer à cet esprit de clocher en ce qui concerne les objectifs et l'étendu de nos recherches ainsi que les methodes que nous utilisons pour engendrer nos theories et poursuivre nos recherches empiriques. Notre maison est une maison divisée, fragmentée. Ceci dit, nous sommes, toutefois, dotés d'une terre fertile; et que nos deux sous-disciplines se partagent une infrastructure méthodologique et thématique favorise bien le début d'un engagement avec les canadianistes.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.026 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.040 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.025 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".