Canadian Foreign Policy at the First Half of the Twentieth Century: From Dominion to Commonwealth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article discusses the way of Canada from the dominion to Commonwealth at the first half of the XX century. A special attention is paid to the imperial idea, the attainment of Canadian foreign policy sovereignty. The author comes to the conclusion that the trend of Canada’s commitment to the imperial idea, was lasting and defined the nature of Canada’s foreign policy in the first half of the XX century This idea was based also on the understanding of the traditional two-party system and a common Anglo-Saxon political culture. On the contrary, in the interwar period, 1919-1939, and after the Second world war, Canada gained sovereignty in foreign policy, primarily due to the Statute of Westminster 1931, and the Imperial Charter in 1949 which recorded the formation of the Commonwealth of Nations instead of the British Colonial Empire. After coming to power of the Сonservative government of B. Mulroney in 1984, Canada has strengthened its sovereignty and headed for Continentalism, i.e. the strengthening of Canadian-American trade relations, which were implemented in the agreements FTA with the US, NAFTA with USA and Mexico.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".