MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2257084477 · doi:10.1353/book.82049

Rethinking Canadian Aid

2016· book· en· W2257084477 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Ottawa Press eBooks · 2016
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)Foreign policyGovernment (linguistics)Political sciencePublic administrationInternational developmentSociologyLawPoliticsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2013, the government abolished the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), which had been Canada’s flagship foreign aid agency for decades, and transferred its functions to the newly renamed Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD). As the government is rethinking Canadian aid and its relationship with other foreign policy and commercial objectives, the time is ripe to rethink Canadian aid more broadly.\n\nEdited by Stephen Brown, Molly den Heyer and David R. Black, this is the first book on Canadian foreign aid since CIDA was folded into DFATD. Designed to reach a variety of audiences, contributions by twenty-one scholars and experts in the field offer an incisive examination of Canada’s record and recent changes in Canadian foreign aid, such as its focus on maternal and child health and on the extractive sector. Many chapters also ask more fundamental questions concerning the intersection of the moral imperative that underpins aid and the trend towards greater self-interest. For instance, what are and what should be the underlying motives of Canadian aid? How compatible are altruism and self-interest in foreign aid? To what extent should aid be integrated with Canada’s other policies and practices?\n\nThe portrait that emerges is a sobering one. This book is essential reading for anyone interested in Canada’s changing role in the world and how it reflects on Canada.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.198 · 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