Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper i»? i»? i»? i»? i»? begin i»? s with an examination of the EPA with a view to pinpointing the contentious terms and conditions which have sparked concern among regional stakeholders. The provisions of the EPA i»? a i»? r i»? e i»? i»? analyzed in the context of its impact on the CSME and the CARICOM-DR Bilateral Agreement. With negotiations having already begun for the conclusion of a Free Trade Agreement between Canada and CARICOM the constraints placed on these negotiations as result of the EPA are i»? i»? i»? looked at. The Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI) was due to expire on 30 September 2008 and according to the website of the United States Trade Representative it has been granted a waiver to 30 September i»? 201 i»? i»? 0 i»? . Once again the impact of the EPA i»? on these negotiations i»? i i»? s i»? i»? considered. The paper i»? i»? i»? close i»? s with thought given to the impact on prospective agreements with the larger developing countries and a prognosis for the future.
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 | 0.013 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".