Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2012, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird stated that Israel has “no better friend ” than Canada. And indeed, an analysis of the voting records of Canada at the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, Human Rights Council, Security Council, and the General Assembly reveals a clear political bias in the voting of the Stephen Harper government towards Israel, a bias that isolates Canada from most of the international community. Not only is Canada supportive of Israel, but a review of Canada’s political and economic relationship with Israel shows that the current relationship is much closer than that of between previous governments. This shift can be explained in part by this current government’s ideological support for Israel, in part by their aspiration to make economic conservatism central to Canadian foreign policy, and, as an aspect of their strategy to appeal to the Conservative voter base. This support for Israel is further reinforced through the secondary factors of a disinterested Canadian public, an underlying orientalist power structure, and the influence of the pro-Israeli lobby. Canada’s new closeness with Israel is not likely to have any long-lasting implications for Canada’s role in the Israel-Palestinian conflict; however, it has likely decreased Canadian influence in the Middle
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.129 | 0.042 |
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".