ЛЕВОРАДИКАЛЬНЫЕ ПОЛИТИЧЕСКИЕ ПАРТИИ И ДВИЖЕНИЯ КАНАДЫ
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global financial crisis of 2008 and the subsequent austerity measures, which affected the well-being of the middle class, provoked an upsurge of the radical left parties and movements in Western European and North American countries. Canada, unlike other western states, was the least affected by the aftermath of the economic crisis; nevertheless, it has also experienced a surge of radical left protests. The article analyzes mass protest movements of 2011-2012 in Canada, including the Occupy and Maple Spring. Historically, the radical left protest in Canada developed in the shape of mass movements (for instance, student movements) rather than parliamentary political parties. Mass protests during the Occupy were initiated less by difficult economic conditions and more by the blurring of the middle class and the decreased social mobility for young educated European Canadians. Local protests in Canadian cities neither developed into broader social movements, nor led to the increased support for left-wing parliamentary political parties. The protests were mostly ignored by the unions and political parties. The future of radical left movements in Canada is unclear: conservatives are leading in the polls for federal elections, whereas the Yellow vests movement in Canada has become a radical right movement. DOI: 10.17072/2218-1067-2019-4-58-66
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.009 |
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".