Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada today is multinational, multicultural, and multi almost everything.Respecting and accommodating all these dimensions of difference are at once our greatest challenge and greatest opportunity.Language and religion have defined the primordial lines of cleavage in Canada's historical experience.The Royal Proclamation of 1763, the Quebec Act of 1774, the Constitutional Act of 1791, the 1837 Rebellion in Lower Canada and the Durham Report that followed it, the Act of Union of 1840, Confederation in 1867, the Riel troubles in western Canada, the conscription crises of the two world wars -all of these have demonstrated just how important this cultural duality has been to our national existence.With the secularization of Canada in the decades following the Second World War, the conflict between Catholic and Protestant has faded into the political background, and language has assumed pre-eminence in defining Canadian duality.How Canadians have responded to language in the postwar period is in important ways a critical template for how Canada has responded to the many other dimensions of Canadian diversity that together compose Canada's reality.Most analyses of Canada's French-English duality have focused on the political and constitutional dimensions of the relationship.How should powers be distributed between federal and provincial governments?Should Quebec be constitutionally regarded as a "nation" within Canada or as a distinct society?Should there be symmetry or asymmetry in the powers of provinces?And so on.These are critical questions that engage citizens, parties, and governments in an ongoing constitutional and intergovernmental debate.But there are equally critical questions relating to duality that are posed for groups and associations of citizens in their personal lives.Indeed, what goes on beneath the surface of political debate, in civil society, may be of even more fundamental importance to the future of the country.That is the premise underlying this book.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.535 | 0.277 |
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".