Bibliographic record
Abstract
State actors are becoming increasingly interested in the economic potential and security dynamics of the Arctic space as the effects of global climatic change rapidly shape the world’s polar spaces. National governments have responded to these changing dynamics by tailoring their defence policies to reflect what they believe to be the most pressing challenges to their presence in the region. This article asks; how is the north framed and whose voices are reflected in Canadian defence policy? It concludes that the conventional framing of Canada’s north remains deeply influenced by the idealized and imagined narratives of Canadian governance with little inclusion of disparate voices.
 By examining the defence white papers of prime ministers Chretien, Martin, Harper, and Trudeau, this article determines that Canadian Arctic security discourse has increased significantly in the post-Cold War era while the region’s Inuit population remain external to its dialogue. This absence of Indigenous voice in Canadian defence policy reflects an unsustainable Eurocentric viewing of the North that is unable to adequately address the region’s changing dynamics. As such, Canada’s future defence policy must acknowledge the distinct and transnational value of Inuit traditional knowledge to overcome the limitations of conventional trans-Atlantic policy frameworks.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".