MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902159646 · doi:10.1108/aeds-09-2017-0091

A turning point in Sino–Canadian relations: 1968 and the favourable political climate

2018· article· en· W2902159646 on OpenAlex
Simon K. Li

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Education and Development Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsChinaCommunismOriginalityPolitical sciencePolitical economyNormalization (sociology)Turning pointValue (mathematics)SociologyLawSocial sciencePeriod (music)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the key domestic conundrums which led to the possibility of rapprochement between Canada and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Design/methodology/approach Adopting a “low politics” approach which emphasizes on individual actors and domestic issues that led to Sino–Canadian rapprochement, this paper draws from both primary and secondary sources which include archives and various historical documents to examine domestic socio-political and economic factors that led to the improved relations between the two states. Findings Sino–Canadian rapprochement was, on the one hand, the result of an increase in liberal activism and intensive socio-political change during the Quiet Revolution in Quebec (where public opinions mattered for federal party leaders) as a consequence of the collapse of ultra-conservative and anti-communist policies under the Duplessis era. Meanwhile, the PRC’s worsening economic situation as a result of the Cultural Revolution and Sino-Soviet tensions of 1968 placed China in a desperate situation to seek foreign aid. With the emergence of Pierre Trudeau’s era and Zhou Enlai’s diplomatic expertise, a further dialogue emerged which subsequently led to the normalization of relations in 1970. Originality/value Usually Canadian scholars studying China regarded 1970 as the watershed in Sino–Canadian relations, but this paper is going to illustrate that even two years before the diplomatic rapprochement, a turning point had already occurred which is 1968.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.276 · 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