Bibliographic record
Abstract
The U.S. security environment has changed dramatically and institutions that defend the continent against common threats must adapt to remain viable. Otherwise, the safety, security, and economic prosperity of North America will be in jeopardy. The World Trade Center attack demonstrated that asymmetric threats can approach the United States from any direction. This attack also reinforced the fact that natural and technological disasters can have international consequences and continental impact. Given this statement, a noticeable missing element in the United States' defense relationship with Canada and Mexico is the absence of a formal policy for bilateral military cooperation in support of civil authorities. Also missing is a Mexican defense coordinating presence at NORAD and USNORTHCOM. Southern aerospace, maritime, and land approaches to the United States are just as important as northern approaches with respect to an attack or consequence management operations. But the absence of common border area military interaction and cooperation limits options and capabilities that can be leveraged against binational disasters and events of continental significance. This thesis examines shared U.S.-Mexican security challenges and argues that a bilateral transnational emergency management framework, which incorporates a civilian-military partnership, can serve as the cornerstone upon which North American defense can be built. To achieve this outcome, the existing Pacific Northwest emergency management cross-border agreements and the role of the National Guard are examined as models for establishing a regionally based emergency management structure.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".