MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7020203833

Keeping Up With The Joneses -A Policy For The Government Of Saskatchewan’s International Relations

2005· report· en· W7020203833 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueoURspace (University of Regina) · 2005
Typereport
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)DominionFederalismKeeping up with the JonesesConstitutionSection (typography)Jurisdiction
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As just one province out of ten, it might be thought that the Saskatchewan government would leave any international concerns and dealings to Canada’s federal government in Ottawa. However, Canada’s brand of federalism provides Saskatchewan with a far more important international role. Since the benchmark decision of the Judicial Committee of the British Privy Council in 1937, the international relations of Canadian provinces are not left solely in the hands of the Canadian government in Ottawa. When the subject matter falls squarely under provincial jurisdiction, according to Section 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867, the judges declared in their summation that these matters must be dealt with “… by cooperation between the Dominion and the Provinces.”1 Saskatchewan was to be responsible for the matters outlined in Section 92, even when these matters had involved international implications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.003
Scholarly communication0.0130.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueoURspace (University of Regina)Same topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207