Bibliographic record
Abstract
The early twenty-first century witnessed a shift in Canadian international action, how such action is portrayed, and how Canada's international history is deployed to understand Canada and its evolution. This shift has contributed to a growing awareness of the intellectual and political significance of Canada's international history and a heightened awareness of the need for a re-engagement with this history to produce more complex narratives. Demonstrating and encouraging such a re-engagement is the purpose of this historiographical article, which traces the writing of Canadian international history from its origins to a period of crisis in the last three decades of the twentieth century. In so doing, it explores how “empire” and its legacy run through this historiography's various overlapping currents. Flowing from this discussion, the article highlights three “tragedies” that have marked the historiography and that are reflective of, and linked to, tragedies in the history of Canadian encounters with the world. This is followed by an examination of current trends that are contributing to a renewed, more expansive literature, thereby emphasizing the value and potential of Canadian international history as a means to obtain greater understanding of Canada as a project of rule.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".