MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744934096 · doi:10.1093/publius/pjx046

Dynamic De/Centralization in Canada, 1867–2010

2017· article· en· W2744934096 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePublius The Journal of Federalism · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecentralizationModernization theoryPolitical scienceNationalismCitizenshipLocalismGlobalizationFederalismPolitical economyPublic administrationEconomic systemEconomicsLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an exceptional character to the Canadian federation when it comes to dynamic de/centralization. Despite expectations that forces of modernization and globalization centralize federations, Canada’s overall “federal balance” has remained largely stable since 1867. Early in the federation’s life, there was decentralization in the fiscal realm and in a few policy fields (e.g., finance and securities as well as employment relations). The last several decades have witnessed decentralization in several policy fields, such as agriculture, citizenship, and immigration, and natural resource, but also centralization in such crucial ones as social welfare and language. The overall slight decentralist path of the Canadian federation occurred primarily through non-constitutional means. Court decisions played a significant role in shaping this path early on, but it is the territorial diversity of the country, primarily but not exclusively nationalism in Québec, along with the original centralized nature of the Canadian federation, that fundamentally accounts for why Canada has not centralized like so many other federations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.268 · 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