The International System: Hinge Moments and Structural Long-Term Trends. A Canadian Perspective Interview with Robert W. Cox
Bibliographic record
Abstract
How did you become a historical materialist?You began life in Montreal in an Anglo-Canadian family.When you look back over the years, how did you come to this very large, rich, and diverse theoretical viewpoint?RC: When I was at McGill University studying history, I was not only studying history in the sense of certain times and places -medieval, modern, European, or Canadian, and so forth-but I also began to think about what the nature of history is.In that regard, one of the things I read was a book called The Idea of History, a collection of lectures and papers by R.G. Collingwood put together and published after Collingwood died.It is a rather coherent collection and it showed me a way of thinking about the nature of history as a form of knowledge.And that stuck with me pretty well through my life.I keep going back to it.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".