Life in a Canadian Foreign Policy generation long ago: The early evolution of a professorial sample of one
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In response to the editors’ request, this article attempts to identify the developmental factors that have influenced the way the author has approached the study of Canadian Foreign Policy. It begins with some comments on the post-World War II international environment and on how it was regarded within his family household. His later exposures to the study of international affairs while an undergraduate at Dalhousie and subsequently at Oxford are then described, the pedagogical emphasis in both cases being focused on historical material. This was less true in the case of his graduate work at the University of Toronto, but even there the sense that historical understanding was essential was reinforced. The author’s overall conclusion has not been that more explicitly theoretical work has no value—quite the contrary—but rather that a knowledge of the detailed particulars, both past and present, cannot be neglected if the application of theoretical ideas to the analysis of specific international problems is to facilitate the cultivation of good judgment and the making of sound policy.
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 | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.049 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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.
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".