MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2481419278 · doi:10.1057/9781137297761_8

Canada’s Fraying Commitment to Multilateral Development Cooperation

2013· book-chapter· en· W2481419278 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephen Brown, Michael Olender

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2013
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsThe North South Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultilateralismPolitical scienceInternational tradeDevelopment economicsEconomicsLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faced with the simultaneous challenges of financial, environmental, and food crises, as well as the growing power of Southern countries, the multilateral development system has not yet adapted to the emerging twenty-first century global development challenges — or rather the states that constitute the system have not yet taken the steps to renew it. On the contrary, Western countries’ support for multilateral development cooperation declined in the 2000s (OECD 2011, 5, 26; Picciotto 2012, 64). Multilateralism has become ‘frayed [at] the edges if not the core’ (Leipziger 2012, 17). While Canada is a relatively small player in global aid, it has traditionally been engaged within institutions and committed to the principles and practice of multilateralism. That commitment, however, has — like those of Canada’s counterparts — been declining. A closer look at the Canadian case illustrates the new shapes that multilateral development cooperation is taking. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0190.009
Scholarly communication0.0120.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207