Reply of the Hon. D.L. MacPherson to ministerial attacks upon his speeches and reflections on the public expenditure of the Dominion published in June last.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
But when such authorities as the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance-enjoying the best means of obtaining accurate information from the Public Departments-have asserted that my statements were unqualifiedly false, and when those assertions have been disseminated far and wide on the wings of the press, they cannot but have implanted in the minds of many honest men serious doubts of the correctness of my representa- tions.Under these circumstances, I feel it due to myself, for the purpose of removing such doubts, to re-affirm all my allegations, and to submit in their support further and irrefragable proof of their accuracy.Although it ought to be incredible that Ministers of the Crown in Canada could stoop to make gross mis-statements to serve the purpose of the hour, yet it is unfortunately susceptible of proof that they did so at their pic-nics.I observed but one allusion to my pamphlet at the early Summer pic-nics.It was made by Mr. Mackenzie, in what, I think, he intended for a spirit of pleasantry.He seemed to think that my allegations could be disposed of without serious examination or argument.But as the summer advanced, Mr. Mackenzie discovered that the facts presented in the pamphlet had sunk deep into the minds of the people, and that he was expected to disprove my charges, or suffer in the estimation of his friends and of the public generally.Thus pressed Mr. Mackenzie attempted to deal
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".