The Public Diplomacy of Federated Entities: Examining the Quebec Model
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Calls to involve a wide range of actors in public diplomacy are coming thick and fast. Federated entities are waiting in line, hoping to advance their international influence and search for distinctiveness and self-affirmation. Despite the increasing interest the development of most federated entities’ public diplomacy has not yet moved out of the early phases: a borderline activity of ‘nation-branding’ and ‘paradiplomacy’. This is true not only in practice but also in the current research, a situation that this article aims to amend. To this end, it is not necessary to start anew but to expand upon more advanced cases in the field. Particular interest is given to Quebec, which is busy creating a distinct profile for public diplomacy and alluding to a more normatively inspired network model. This article examines the public diplomacy model of Quebec’s ministry of international relations, and interprets the findings for federated entities in light of new evolutions in the field. The article concludes that despite significant discourse on public diplomacy development, major reforms remain in the realm of theory.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it