MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328045603 · doi:10.1017/s0032247410000343

We are a northern country: Stephen Harper and the Canadian Arctic

2010· article· en· W2328045603 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the 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

VenuePolar Record · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBritish AcademyUniversity of AlbertaAustralian Government
KeywordsArcticState (computer science)PoliticsPolitical sciencePrime ministerGovernment (linguistics)The arcticLawPublic administrationPolitical economySociologyOceanographyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Two Canadian Speeches from the Throne (2007, 2010) form the centrepiece of this brief analysis of Stephen Harper and his government's approach towards the Arctic. In essence, it is argued that a form of actionism prevails; a preference for being seen to be taking action in the face of apparent uncertainly regarding the Arctic and the activities of other stakeholders. Unpinned by what Michael Billig termed ‘habit of language’, this note considers how Prime Minister Harper mobilises domestic political support for this proposals. However, it is a risky strategy. As the 2010 meeting of the five Arctic Ocean coastal states revealed, other stakeholders such as the United States in the form of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly rebuked Canada for attempting to limit participation in talks about the future of the Arctic.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.248 · 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