Bibliographic record
Abstract
The malaise felt by both Canadians and Americans regarding several areas of trade does not exist in a vacuum. It is not difficult to surmise that besides the genuine tension owing to actual implementation of liberal trade principles in the trade practise between the two states, and to their diverging interpretations of these principles, lies also some political opportunism. Not only has the US pursued a unilateralist course in its trade relations with Canada; it did so also in matters security, which have created, at least a perception, of an unfavourable impact on Canadian economic interests. The US current beleaguered international reputation in matters foreign policy regarding both security and economic issues may therefore tilt the pendulum in Canada’s favour. From a power contest point of view, perhaps now is the time and opportunity for Canada to reap also international “moral” (juridical), in addition to economic, gains.
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 | 0.018 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.044 | 0.004 |
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".