MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413808114 · doi:10.1080/00358533.2025.2548967

Canada–UK relations in a post-transatlantic world: pursuing strategic pragmatism

2025· article· en· W4413808114 on OpenAlexaffabout
Evan H. Potter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Round Table · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPragmatismPolitical scienceTransatlantic relationsPublic administrationEconomic historyPolitical economySociologyPoliticsHistoryLawEpistemologyPhilosophyForeign policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For over 60 years, Canada’s foreign policy has been overwhelmingly oriented towards the United States, while the United Kingdom has looked to Europe. Recent geopolitical upheavals – the United Kingdom’s exit from the European Union, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and a second Trump administration alienating its closest allies – have disrupted these longstanding alignments, creating a unique strategic window for Ottawa and London to deepen their bilateral relationship. This crisis of the liberal international order has forced both countries to revitalise their ‘special relationship’ in ways not witnessed since the early post-Second World War era. By highlighting key markers in the historical arc of Canada–UK relations – from post-war solidarity and diplomatic divergences through decades of enduring institutional interdependence – this study demonstrates how shared values, complementary economic strengths and mutual security interests can be harnessed to forge a renewed bilateral partnership based on strategic pragmatism. It outlines the conditions for this bilateral re-set through deeper Canada–UK economic ties, joint defence-security initiatives and coordinated diplomatic engagement at the multilateral level tailored to an era of global disorder.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.963

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0310.020
Scholarly communication0.0190.005
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Round TableSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207