Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Canadian policy of multiculturalism recognised the positive and permanent influence of immigration on Canadian society and accepted “nation”-formation based on a model of cultural pluralism. Thus it assumed a radical “modification” of Canadian cultural definitions, instead of a formal adoption of certain “major” national cultural traditions. Canadian society, at the same time, experienced a growing divergence between the official policy of inclusion, and the increasing social exclusion of new immigrants – primarily “visible” minority groups – from economic spheres and from public life in general. In fact, the existing deep tensions in the society between two value systems – on the one hand, the reality of wide-spread racism, and on the other hand, the commitment to an ideology of liberal democracy, as well as poor results in integration policies, as indicated by marked unemployment, low incomes and poverty, especially in immigrant communities – have led to more and more frequent references to a prevailing “democratic racism” in Canada. With regard to the mentioned context, this paper first of all aims to indicate certain specificities in the development of ethnic relations and of multicultural policy, which are engrained and at the same time limited by their particular historical origin. Next, the paper intends to say something about the power of influence of the government’s multicultural policy, and the role of political correctness, as a concrete form of social action, in interethnic relations and in the opinions of the majority society in regard to ethnic minorities, and especially in regard to “visible” groups.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 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".