MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7017619355

The Calgary School through the lens of Alexis de Tocqueville

2020· dissertation· en· W7017619355 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2020
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Theory and Influence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyReading (process)Theme (computing)CriticismPerspective (graphical)Critical theory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis aims to further expand on the intellectual influence of Tocqueville in the Calgary School’s work. It is aimed at trying to better understand the Calgary School and Alexis de Tocqueville. This thesis tries to address a lack of literature on the Calgary School, there is a lack of literature on them and oftentimes they are dismissed out of hand by left-leaning scholars and critics. This project is not an apology for the Calgary School merely to better understand their ideas and the influences behind them. To accomplish this goal three different themes are used that correspond to the first three chapters of this thesis. The overall common thread or unifying theme used to tie Tocqueville and the Calgary is a critique of the trajectory of liberal democracy, that while critical still supports the basic tenets of liberal democracy. This leads to an understanding that is more subtle, and more generous reading of neoconservative thought in Canada. Categorizations such as neoconservative can in fact be misleading and misrepresentative of the actual thought and ideas of the authors at hand. There are firm philosophical underpinnings to the thought of the Calgary School. Neoconservatism can be perspective that is both sensitive to the values of liberal democracy and critical of the problems inherent with it. While not without its issues, neoconservatism deserves to have its influences more thoroughly investigated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicPolitical Theory and InfluenceFrench-language works237,207