Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Pacific Scandal of 1873, not trade policy, proved Macdonald&s;s undoing. Canada&s;s farmers lived and died by foreign markets, and anything that impeded their trade smacked of inefficiency and special interest. Rumors indicated that the Americans might be interested in a twenty-one year pact invoking free trade in natural resources. The history of Canada&s;s two centrist parties has thus been periodically punctuated by astonishing role reversals, "flip-flops" in contemporary political parlance. Our political history has been mile-posted by federal elections in which trade policy has monopolized the agenda: 1878, 1891, 1911, 1921, 1925, 1930 and, like a grand finale, 1988. Straightforward political opportunism offers an expedient explanation, at first sight, for the meanderings of the Tories and Grits on trade policy. Canadians had a strong predilection for close bilateral trade ties since long before Confederation. During the 1896 election, Laurier obfuscated the trade issue for fear of alienating support in all-important Montreal and Ontario&s;s rural ridings.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".