Bibliographic record
Abstract
Commission is one of the landmarks in Canada's political and constitutional history.Landmarks are ofen best studied from a distance, bathed in the rising or setting sun.When the Royal Commission on Dominion-Provincial Relations was appointed in 1937, many Canadians thought the sun was setting.Canada's economic problems seemed to be insurmountable, and ordinary politics had failed to fnd a solution.On a more fundamental level, many suspected that the Canadian federal constitution had made matters worse, linking not only disparate geographies but possibly incompatible economies.Finding a solution transcended ordinary politics.Mackenzie King's Liberal government in Ottawa had signifcant problems of its own.Civil war in Spain presaged a larger European confict.In 1937, Canada began slowly and prudently, according to King's taste, to rearm.Tere problems arose with nationalists in Quebec, bumptious Ontario-frsters, economic evangelism in Alberta, a dustbowl in Saskatchewan, and aggrieved provincial leaders in the Maritimes and British Columbia.To look into these many problems and suggest solutions, Mackenzie King appointed a classic Canadian inquiry, later named Rowell-Sirois afer its two functional heads, Newton Rowell and Joseph Sirois.Te name was justifed: these two individuals headed an extraordinary collection of personalities -lawyers, economists, political scientists, historians, and sociologists, who trundled across the country meeting an equally extraordinary gaggle of politicians.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.713 | 0.646 |
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".