Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract.Many people in Canada are frightened by the right of local self-government, because they are afraid of the privatization of public authority. This article suggests that municipalities can be otherwise conceived, and that a right of local self-government can be vindicated without impairing the capacity of the state or encouraging a debilitating privatism. The key is to understand that municipalities can be non-exclusive public authorities, on a different register from the state or civil society. Résumé.La crainte de la privatisation des pouvoirs publics mène de nombreux Canadiens et Canadiennes à redouter le droit à l'autonomie gouvernementale locale. Cet article suggère qu'il est possible d'envisager les municipalités autrement, et qu'on peut justifier le droit à l'autonomie gouvernementale locale sans faire entrave aux compétences de l'État et sans encourager un privatisme débilitant. L'important est de comprendre que les municipalités peuvent exercer un pouvoir public non exclusif dans leur propre zone de compétence, jouant sur un registre différent de celui de l'État ou de la société civile.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".