Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada is one of the world’s leading mining powerhouses, but in order to stay that way it needs access to new mineral reserves - and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has trillions worth. Due to the scale of the DRC's mineral deposits, Canadian mining companies have sought to explore and develop assets in the Central African nation in the past. These Canadian firms, however, have been the subject to corrupt governments and other issues. In the past, Canadian governments have sought to protect Canadian mining assets in the DRC only when they came under attack. That is to say, Canada's approach to foreign policy in the DRC has been reactionary. This paper argues that Canada ought to take a proactive approach to foreign policy in the DRC by supporting institution building and economic development which will, ultimately, benefit both Canadians and the Congolese. Canadian mining firms will be able to develop new assets, increasing profits for Canadian workers and shareholders. On the other hand, the Congolese will benefit from stronger institutions, economic development, and the ability for their country to effectively allocate the capital generated from a robust mining sector.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".