Bibliographic record
Abstract
The phrase, "the federal spending power," identifies the federal government's ability to spend in areas beyond its constitutional authority to legislate-a power that has supported the development of a national system of universal healthcare coverage in Canada. Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, this power was critical to the expansion of Canada's narrow but deep basket of universally covered services. The challenges exposed by the pandemic mean that still more federal investment will be required. Yet for traditionalists, the material basis of this power is now constrained: the federal government may possess the constitutional authority to invest, but it lacks the fiscal capacity; some form of belt tightening-even austerity-will be necessary. As debates over public spending intensify, health leaders will need to address these questions. Depending on how they do so, health leaders will either support or detract from a healthy recovery.
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 | 0.015 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.017 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".