A Glance of the Free Trade Agreement between Mexico and the European Union
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mexico has had a notable trade performance in the last years as result of a process of economic liberalisation and internal structural reforms that started in the mid-1980s and consolidated in the 1990s by establishing a network of free trade agreements. The FTA between the European Union and Mexico is a consequence of many advantages, among others to open up a bigger markets, same legal footing as their competitors and new potential investments. The liberalisation is phased until 2007. Mexico has had a big jump in exports through NAFTA, and nowadays has a preferential access to the world's largest market, the EU. In addition, Mexico offers better conditions for investment because the work force and the private sector during the past 8 years (since NAFTA) have learned to compete efficiently against the American and Canadian firms. Actually, the free trades agreements have enabled to obtain gains from globalisation and market diversification through regional and bilateral negotiations being a powerful instrument for Mexico's economic growth and development. In conclusion, the new free trade agreement instead of dispiriting the distribution of income will promote (in the long-term) equality for the Mexicans, because of the productivity and the access to new opportunities
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".