MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116403567 · doi:10.11575/prism/50868

The Canadian Approach to the NWP: Shifts from 2008-2025

2025· other· en· W7116403567 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aidan Andrew Pleša

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Calgary · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsArcticCircumpolar starThematic analysisContext (archaeology)Human securityThe arcticNational securityCorporate governance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.170 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of CalgaryFrench-language works237,207