La collaboration scientifique et technologique en Amérique du Nord : un point de vue Canadien
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada, as a country with a small, open economy, faces the immediate challenge of learning to shape dynamic comparative advantage in the emerging international economy. About 75 % of Canada's trade linkages are with the United States, and a very large component of the Canadian experience of « globalization » is driven by North American economic integration. This integration is taking place in the absence of institutions and policy mechanisms to promote and manage science, technology, and innovation relations on a continental scale. Bilateral s & T arrangements centered on the United States presently characterize the North American innovation System. Circumstances in North America pose three sets of challenges to Canadian s & T policy. 1) Science and technology are increasing in importance in international trade, environmental, and social/cultural matters. This means that Canada must learn to improve its management of an increasingly internationalized domestic s & T System. 2) Canada must cultivate mutually beneficial bilateral s & T relationships with its two partners in NAFTA, Mexico and the United States. 3) Canada must identify where its interests lie in the development and governance of trilateral and international rules and arrangements for science, technology, and innovation.
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 | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
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".