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
In 1957 after a century of scathing debates and threats of provincial separation Ottawa finally tackled the dangerous fiscal inequalities among its richer and poorer provinces. Equalization grants allowed the poorer provinces to provide relatively equal services for relatively equal levels of taxation. The Art of Sharing tells the dramatic history of Canada's efforts to save itself. The introduction of federal equalization grants was controversial and wealthier provinces such as Alberta - wanting to keep more of their taxpayers' money for their own governments - continue to attack them today. Mary Janigan argues that the elusive ideal of fiscal equity in spite of dissent from richer provinces has helped preserve Canada as a united nation. Janigan goes back to Confederation to trace the escalating tensions among the provinces across decades as voters demanded more services to survive in a changing world. She also uncovers the continuing contacts between Canada and Australia as both dominions struggled to placate disgruntled member states and provinces that blamed the very act of federation for their woes. By the mid-twentieth century trapped between the demands of social activists and Quebec's insistence on its right to run its own social programs Ottawa adopted non-conditional grants in compromise. The history of equalization in Canada has never been fully explored. Introducing the idealistic Canadians who fought for equity along with their radically different proposals to achieve it The Art of Sharing makes the case that a willingness to share financial resources is the real tie that has bound the federation together into the twenty-first century
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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