Is Canada still a fair player in global politics?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This presentation explores Canada’s role and reputation in global politics, analyzing its historical position as a middle-sized power known for multilateral diplomacy, peacekeeping, and human rights advocacy. It delves into Canada’s geography, demographics, and strategic use of its oceans, highlighting its dependency on the United States for trade. The presentation also discusses challenges to Canada’s global standing, such as losing its bid for a UN Security Council seat, complex diplomatic relations with emerging powers like India and China, and criticisms of its foreign policy stance on global conflicts. It concludes by assessing Canada's potential to reclaim its leadership on the international stage, emphasizing the need for renewed commitment to multilateralism and addressing internal and external challenges in areas like Arctic governance, environmental diplomacy, and Indigenous reconciliation.This presentation was given as part of a joint seminar organized at Uppsala University by the<i> Swedish Institute of North American Studies</i>, the <i>Nordic Institute of Latin American Studies</i>, and the <i>Centre for Canadian Studies</i> on 24 September 2024.<br>
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 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 teacher head, 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".