Bibliographic record
Abstract
The works presented in this book are the result of an interdisciplinary Euro Canadian research programme which focuses on new forms of social com plexity.1 The term most commonly used to refer to the liquid nature of our late modernity – as Zygmunt Bauman famously characterized it – has so far been that of globalization, but the spatial dimension is only one side to this phenomenon. Globalization can also be seen as a synchronization process that generates new patterns of social complexity. This simultane ous interconnectedness manifests itself in the proliferation of social and economic drivers and in the transformation of political and institutional spaces, which in turn generate new couplings between territory and power and, in a reverse course, tend to deterritorialize some social relations. The result has been the general erosion of the nationstate as the hegemonic form of political organization. The allocation conflicts along class lines within selfcontained states, which characterized the simple diversity of industrial societies, have thus given way to a combination of social, political, and cultural cleavages that overlap and compete for legitimacy at a national and supranational level. Europe and North America are without doubt the largest experimentation fields for these changes. Canada, however, while inscribed in the American continent, more closely resembles European societies in many of its political institutions and its social values than its neighbour to the south. Therefore, had it not been for the Atlantic divide, this country would be a suitable candidate for the now seemingly fraying European experiment. Moreover, for decades Canada has been viewed as a pioneering society in the management of diversity, as reflected in its expe riences with federalism, multiculturalism, linguistic rights, aboriginal self government, reasonable accommodation, and international peacekeeping, which empowers it to offer some interesting similarities and contrasts with Europe. The conventional perception of Canada as a soft power, however, has not gone without challenges from the inside, as former Conservative cabinets have attempted to rewrite the Canadian narrative by proposing a more selfassertive version.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.440 | 0.316 |
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".