MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033035733 · doi:10.17118/11143/18892

Le chant des sirènes et la politique étrangère canadienne sur le climat : bilan du gouvernement Trudeau

2019· article· fr· W3033035733 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Annie Chaloux

Bibliographic record

Venue˜Le œclimatoscope · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

« Canada is back my friend, and we are here to help ». Telle était la phrase lancée par le nouveau premier ministre Justin Trudeau à son arrivée à la 21e Conférence des Parties (CdP-21) à Paris en 2015. Les attentes étaient fortes, tant sur le territoire canadien que sur la scène internationale : on pouvait légitimement anticiper une nouvelle politique étrangère canadienne à l’égard du climat qui soit plus engagée dans la lutte contre les changements climatiques. Le rôle constructif alors joué par la nouvelle ministre de l’Environnement, Catherine McKenna, dans le dernier droit permettant d’accoucher de l’Accord de Paris en 2015, mais aussi le discours et, plus largement, l’attitude générale du nouveau gouvernement canadien sur cette question avait généré son lot d’espoir dans la lutte globale contre les changements climatiques. Quatre années ont passé, et il devient pertinent de s’interroger sur ce retour annoncé du Canada face aux changements climatiques sur la scène internationale. Plus concrètement, quel bilan pouvons-nous faire de la politique étrangère canadienne à l’égard du climat à l’aube de l’élection fédérale qui approche à grands pas?

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.107
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0240.022
Scholarly communication0.0130.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜Le œclimatoscopeSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207