MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109783760 · doi:10.1177/0095327x20970535

Huntington in Canada: The Triumph of Subjective Control

2020· article· en· W3109783760 on OpenAlex
Peter Kasurak

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueArmed Forces & Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDefense, Military, and Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlienationPoliticsLegislationState (computer science)Independence (probability theory)Control (management)LawSocial controlPolitical scienceSociologyPublic administrationPolitical economyCriminologyManagementEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Samuel Huntington theorized in The Soldier and the State that rather than make the military in the image of society (subjective control), both superior civilian control and military outcomes would result if the military was allowed its own sphere and culture, shaped by military requirements (objective control). Since 1963, the Canadian Armed Forces have argued for objective control, while political leadership and the country have largely paid little attention to military demands for greater social independence. An examination of defense policy, the “civilianization” crisis, the Somalia Inquiry, and diversity legislation and programs demonstrate the triumph of subjective control. This article concludes that subjective control has had costs to civilians in military shirking and to the military in alienation from its parent society. Huntington remains useful, but it is time to consider modern alternatives to understand civil-military relationships.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.173 · 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