Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study offers a comprehensive security analysis of Canada’s evolving approach to the Northwest Passage (NWP) within the broader context of Arctic policy since 2008. While previous research has addressed individual dimensions of Canadian Arctic policy, few have systematically explored the interplay of domestic and international factors related to security, such as geopolitics and the environment, which shape Canada’s approach towards the NWP. Through a thematic content analysis grounded in the comprehensive security framework (CSF), this research analyzes six official Canadian federal documents since 2008 to examine thematic shifts in language and policy emphasis regarding the NWP. The CSF enables a holistic analysis of Arctic security by broadening the focus on political, military, economic, environmental, and human dimensions which all influence national security considerations. By mapping Canada’s shifting and evolving language and policy priorities towards the Arctic and the NWP, this study contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the complex interplay of various dimensions of security that shape Arctic governance and security in a period of geopolitical tensions and accelerating climate change. The study finds that Canada, along with many other Arctic and non-Arctic states, have placed increased attention on the region and maritime shipping, recognizing that melting sea ice and improving technologies allows for increased activity in the circumpolar North.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".