Bibliographic record
Abstract
The year 1982 marked the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, creating the EEC, and the tenth anniversary of Canada s Third Option, which aimed in part at using the new Europe as a counterweight to American influence. This article attempts, first to set the last ten year s of Canada s European policy in the context of postwar economic and strategic relationships and, secondly, to evaluate the European aspect of the Third Option and its prospects for the 1980s. Canada s image of, and policy towards, Western Europe, has always had two distinct elements — economic and strategic - whose interplay describes various phases of the relationship. Until about 1957, the two images were roughly congruent and Canada s economic and military policies mutually reinforcing. A multilateral Atlantic economic community was seen as the underpinning of collective defence. The next fifteen years or so saw the breakup of this patte m, with the emergence of the Community, continued British attempts to join from 1961 on, and the decline in Canadian support for NATO. The birth of the Third Option and the pursuit of the Framework Agreement with the Community saw the gradual revival of Canada's military relationship with Europe, this time in the service of economic diversification and growth. A variety of factors, however - global, European, North American and domestic Canadian - hampered the development of the new link with the Community. Many of these, especially the structural ones underlying the crisis of the world economy and the stagnation of European integration - are likely to persist through the 1980 s. For the next few year s, then, the European option will probably be (a) less communautaire, (b) a less important focus in trade policy relative to other areas, and (c) once more in the service of military and political ends.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".