MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2202973548 · doi:10.1177/002070200806300325

Review: Dispersed Relations

2008· article· en· W2202973548 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Edward P. Kohn

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DISPERSED RELATIONS Americans and Canadians in North Reginald C. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2007. 404PP, U S $60.00 cloth (ISBN 978-0801887857)The events of 9/11, war in Afghanistan, and American invasion of Iraq resulted in a deterioration of Canadian-American relations to a level not seen in decades. Editorials in Canadian press blamed American foreign policy for terrorist attacks, a sentiment echoed by Prime Minister Jean Chretien on first anniversary of attacks. In Afghanistan in April 2002, an American plane mistakenly killed four Canadian troops in a tragic friendly-fire incident Following American invasion of Iraq in March 2003, regular protest marches in Montreal ended at American consulate, and Americans visiting Canada with their ubiquitous post-9/11 flag decals did so at their own risk. Meanwhile, official Ottawa-Washington relationship cooled to a frosty level not seen since Kennedy-Diefenbaker estrangement.In Dispersed Relations: Americans and Canadians in North America, Reginald Stuart, professor of history and political and Canadian studies at Mount Saint Vincent University in Halifax, offers a timely reminder to policymakers on both sides of border of wealth of commonalities shared by two countries. Stuart, well-known to historians of Canadian-American relations for his award-winning book United States Expansionism and North America, 1775-1871, attempts to summarize shared Canadian and American and interests in cultural, society, economic, and political realms. A thematic division such as this means some repetition, since such a topic as tourism and travel is neither purely economic nor sociaL Yet offers a comprehensive overview of almost everything North American, from split-run magazines and NAFTA to open skies and Peter Jennings.For students of North American borderlands or transnationaT history, much of ground covers will seem familiar, and Dispersed Relations offers little new research. Instead it seems more like a primer for those unfamiliar with past 25 years of work that treats 49th parallel as a mere political construct - of which Stuart s previous book is an excellent example. Even general readers will probably not be very surprised to learn that Americans and (mainly) English-Canadians, sharing a language, history, and one of longest borders in world, actually have much in common. In conclusion to his section on the social realm, observes, The border has proven permeable to mores and attitudes that produced parallel and similar social reforms through time. Shared democratic and human rights, faith in rule of law, individualism flowing from constitutional provisions, balanced individual and community outlooks, and broad tolerance have produced two remarkably similar societies where themes and issues have transnational characteristics (140-41). This conclusion summarizes much of book, and has been noted by writers on both sides of border for over 100 years.Some awkward prose and terminology make Dispersed Relations a difficult read. very title is perplexing. If dispersed means scattered, how can Canadian- American relations be scattered? Upper North America is not a well-known term, and fails to define it clearly. Is term meant to discount Mexico, American states acquired from Mexico, or American deep south? …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.013
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.009

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal Canada s Journal of Global Policy Analysis→Same topicCanadian Identity and History→French-language works237,207→