Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this edition of Canada: State of the Federation, contributors consider whether and to what degree the relationship between the central government and the provincial and territorial governments has changed in the past decade. The authors address three overarching questions. First, is the power base changing in Canada? If so, how are governments responding? Second, what are the implications of the changing environment for the relationships between governments? And third, are there underlying forces – such as economic or technological change, or demands for citizen engagement – that are pushing some provinces and regions to become more assertive in the global environment? The papers are organized into four categories: those that identify and analyze the changing federal environment; those concerned with the implications of the 2011 federal election; those that deal with health policy and economic federalism; and those that explore the growing importance of the North and the changing dynamics among the provinces and the federal government. Among the topics discussed are the impact of a majority government based on a West-Ontario coalition, with Quebec represented primarily by the Opposition, the implications of the trade-off between health care spending and the public financing of other essential public goods, and second-generation trade agreements, such as the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Trade Agreement.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.061 | 0.016 |
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".