Les puissances secondaires et l’influence des attributs relationnels : le cas du Canada et de sa politique extérieure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyses et middle or « lesser » powers, unlike those of great and small powers, have not secured a distinctive place in the international politics literature and have generally not contributed to or borrowed from contemporary theoretical developments. The present study examines the foreign policy behavior of a lesser power (Canada) with an interrelated set of hypotheses drawn from theories explaining behavior as a function of the attributes of targets and actors. The four « relational » attributes employed here are status, salience, similarity, and proximity. Quantitative measures for these relational factors and for five categories of Canadian behavior across 51 (Canada to x) dyads are developed with particular attention being paid to questions of empirical-theoretical fit. Correlational analysis reveals many of the relational attributes and indicators explain a significant amount of variation in the behavior measures. Greater status, salience and proximity generally lead to more frequent Canadian activity. Status differences are particularly strongly related to all five types of dyadic behavior. Similarity appears a less influential factor. A further partial correlation analysis suggests that for Canada the relational attributes are interrelated with each other and with behavior in a patterned way. Greater proximity leads to increased salience, as do greater status and similarity. In turn, greater salience, status and similarity all lead to more frequent behavior of most types. These results tend to support some and refute other general hypotheses about target-actor attributes and behavior, and perhaps suggest some particular features of lesser power activity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".