Financing indigenous nationalism in Sri-Lanka: the Canadian-Tamil connection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the post 9/11 world, Canada can no longer be perceived as a safe resource base\nfor supporters of anti-state political terrorism. As a signatory to international conventions\nagainst terrorism and its financing, Canada has mandated its National Security agencies\nto target groups, such as the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), who, prior to\n9/11, freely operated within Canada. Still, the LTTE, who have fought a civil war against\nthe Sinhalese authorities of Sri Lanka, have historically enjoyed substantial financial\nsupport amongst the more than 200,000 Tamil expatriates living in Canada.\n\nThis major paper examines the causes that compel many Tamil Canadians to\ncontinue to fund the LTTE despite enjoying relative economic and social stability in\nCanada. Central to this major paper is a survey administered to Tamil Canadians that\nexamined the nature of the nationalistic sentiments felt towards the motherland and\ntowards the general objectives of the LTTE. It will be argued that despite these\nsentiments, Tamil Canadians have a strong desire to find a peaceful solution to the\nconflict. This major paper will conclude by exploring how Tamil Canadians and Canada\ncan work together to eliminate financial support to the LTTE and bring peace to Sri\nLanka. As this major paper was being submitted for final approval, the LTTE leader and\nsome of his commanders were killed by the Sri Lankan Army, who claimed a complete\nmilitary victory over the LTTE. However, despite the government’s euphoria over the\napparent end of the conventional war, the fight against terrorism is far from over.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".