MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097673977

LONG KNIVES, LONG MEMORIES AND “PEOPLES ’ PACKAGES”: THE FEDERAL STRATEGY FOR CONSTITUTIONAL PATRIATION AND THE DYNAMICS OF IDENTITY CONTENTION

2014· article· en· W7097673977 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Systems and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCabinet (room)NegotiationCharterConstitutionIdentity (music)Principal (computer security)Prime ministerDynamics (music)Collective identity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whether it is remembered as a traumatic event or great accomplishment, one thing that can be certain about the First Ministers ’ Conference of 1981 is that its legacy lives on in Canadian politics. Constitutional negotiations among the prime minister and provincial premiers in 1981 produced the only ‘packaged ’ agreement since Confederation to achieve even the minimal support necessary to achieve ratification. The resulting Constitution Act of 1982, which included the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, remains in place and is the principal manifestation of intergovernmental bargaining from over two decades ago. This study, which unfolds in four sections, attempts to assess the strategic interaction and conflict processes that took place between Ottawa and the provinces in negotiations leading up to that fateful November 1981 conference. Learning more about how respective governments represented provincial and national interests at that time may help in dealing with ongoing and similar conflicts today, that is, the difficult questions associated with regional and identity politics. After a brief overview, we review theorizing about conflict processes, with an emphasis on the dynamics of identity contention. Then the background to the constitutional crisis of 1980-81 is summarized. The next section focuses on the federal strategy in the crisis as indicated by minutes from cabinet meetings. Finally, the contributions of the preceding sections are summed up and ideas are put forward for further research.

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)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.057
Scholarly communication0.0120.011
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.271 · 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
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolitical Systems and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207