International trade and labor issues: Linkages and tensions in a globalizing economy.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis has been inspired by the current attempts to formally link international labor and trade systems. It explores the relationship that exists between these systems and how it has been affected by the globalization of economy and legalization of global affairs. The major focus of this study is to show the tensions that accompany the attempts to bring international labor and trade systems into closer cooperation. Especially the divisions between the developed and developing countries are examined. This study looks at these issues from the liberal perspective. It provides a comprehensive analysis of the trade and labor systems exploring their structures, major objectives and principles. It looks at the documents, reports and conference materials to find the provisions and stances that regard the linkages between labor and trade. Also, an overview of relevant literature is offered to show major concepts there presented. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)Dept. of History, Philosophy, and Political Science. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2004 .M55. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 43-03, page: 0729. Adviser: Anna Lanoszka. Thesis (M.A.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2004.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".