Bibliographic record
Abstract
This second vertical role contestation case comparison follows the aftermath of the Sri Lankan civil war, when the Tamil diaspora in Canada and the UK mobilised for transitional justice, an end to human rights abuses against Tamils and the continued struggle for Tamil self-determination. Agency changes in both countries significantly advantaged the Tamil diaspora, particularly the diaspora&s;s increased focus on creating inside advocates within formerly sceptical Conservative parties, as the salience of diaspora communities for conservative parties in both countries grew in parallel. As the Tamil diaspora pressured both governments to boycott the 2013 Commonwealth summit in Sri Lanka, I argue that in both cases Tamil diaspora elites became temporary entrants in foreign policy decision-making as role-makers. In this case, Canada&s;s disrupter role conception aligned entirely with the preferences of the Tamil diaspora and the Harper government performed to the fullest extent in accordance with the diaspora&s;s preferences. Tamil diaspora elites again compelled a British role conception in their favour, but due to the UK&s;s indispensable role within the Commonwealth it was unable to perform to the extent desired by the diaspora, failing to boycott the summit. The UK&s;s role as an indispensable actor in the Commonwealth prevented a role performance change, as it would have jeopardised the existence of the institution. However, the Tamil diaspora demonstrated its influence by ensuring Prime Minister Cameron&s;s attendance shined a light on the lack of transitional justice and continued human rights abuses.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 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".