Federalism, nationalism and regionalism in Canda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article analyses the capacity of Canadian federalism to articulate and accommodate the dual and regionalist character defining Canada through a range of arguments and opinions both for and against that have been generated both within the Canadian Federation and abroad. From the standpoint of the Quebec sovereignists, federalism is highly restrictive of the Quebec nation's freedom to express itself, by itself, within the Canadian context as well as within international ambits; for Quebec nationalists, the term Quebec "nation" implies-indeed, requires-a "Quebec state". But, from the standpoint of the Quebec federalists (a good number of whom understand Quebec as a sociological and political nation), the future of Quebec lies with its membership of the Canadian Federation, however much this has to recognise Quebec as a "differential society" within Canada, and however much it has to ensure that Quebec will develop and promote its interests as a nation. For yet others, the decentralist character of Canadian federalism, and the extensive provisions for asymmetry built into the system, mean that Quebec is already perhaps the most powerful sub-national government in the world, such that it already has the powers necessary to fulfil its national destiny, within the federation. Opinion outside Quebec ranges from those who accept this view, and embrace asymmetry, to those who argue that Quebec is simply one of ten existing provinces, each of which is distinct, and which should all be treated as equals in accordance with the constitutional and political framework.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".