Tracking Quantum S&T from strategy to implementation plan: what we learned about the Canadian Armed Forces’ quantum posture
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
The Department of National Defence has been an important actor in the shaping of Canada’s strategic approach to quantum science and technology through the release of two key documents: the Quantum S&T [Science and Technology] Strategy and the Quantum 2030 implementation plan. This article examines how the DND/CAF quantum strategies have been implemented over recent years and identifies how the approach to quantum science and technology has become more threat-focused. Through a mixed-method discourse analysis of these strategic documents, we argue that there is a transition of the Canadian stance from viewing quantum science and technology as a neutral space with opportunities and threats, to a more dangerous domain. We conclude that there is a significant intensification of threat language, discuss potential explanatory factors, and sketch out further research areas.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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