Kulturní diplomacie Kanady
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In current era of globalization when cultural diplomacy became one of the inherent tools of "soft power" of a foreign policy, it is relevant to research on the place of cultural diplomacy in foreign policy portfolio of nation-states. The focus of this thesis is to evaluate the attitudes of the Canadian government towards cultural diplomacy from 1990s until today. In 1995, Canadian values and culture became one of the three pillars of Canadian foreign policy. The author therefore attempted to map whether cultural diplomacy became a coherent and strategic tool of the Canadian foreign policy during this era. By analyzing the tools of the Canadian cultural diplomacy of the Liberal governments of Jean Chretien, Paul Martin and the present Conservative government of Stephen Harper, the author seeks to answer whether we are witnessing a gradual eclipse of cultural diplomacy as a means of soft power under the Harper administration. The research of government documents and cultural diplomacy programs along with the analysis of interviews with important government officials suggest that the cultural diplomacy was not practiced as a strategic tool in foreign policy management until the third election term of Jean Chretien in the year of 2000. Since then we can track fulfilling the Third Pillar as an...
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".