Bibliographic record
Abstract
From 1963 until 1971, a group of distinguished Canadians wrestled with the language conflict that ran the risk of tearing the country apart. Among their ranks, F.R. Scott – a poet, intellectual, constitutional expert, human rights activist, and law professor – kept diaries that recounted the meetings of one of Canada’s most significant royal commissions. The Fate of Canada introduces readers to Scott’s biography, puts his diary entries into the political context of the time, and identifies the people he met and the places he visited during the hearings of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism. Scott’s journal entries recording the earliest meetings convey optimism for a bilingual Canada. As the years pass, however, he becomes increasingly concerned that bilingualism is in danger, and Quebec’s English community threatened. His remarks convey a sense of humour and mutual respect amongst the commissioners despite the tensions over language within the group – and across the country. Scott was a champion of English-language rights in Quebec. Never before published, these diaries provide remarkable insight into the inner life of one of twentieth-century Canada’s most significant intellectuals, and a royal commission that shaped the nation’s language policy for decades to come.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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".