MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1555928750

CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE AT THE U.S.-CANADIAN BORDER

2013· article· en· W1555928750 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kyle W. Killingbeck

Bibliographic record

VenueCalhoun: The Naval Postgraduate School Institutional Archive (Naval Postgraduate School) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStraddleMindsetPolitical scienceStatus quoGeneral partnershipForeign policyState (computer science)Variety (cybernetics)TerrorismPolitical economyPublic administrationDevelopment economicsPoliticsSociologyEconomicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The U.S.-Canada relationship encompasses strong partnership and economic interdependence; however, policy conflicts are prevalent throughout its history. Acute eventsfor example, the September 11, 2001, terror attacksexacerbate the conflict, while raising the stakes of disunity between these two long-standing allies. Opposing policy priorities also undermine and interfere with their relationship. American policymakers have a security-first mindset while Canadians are primarily focused on efficient cross-border trade. Caught in the middle are the Great Lakes regional states that must straddle this policy divide. This thesis addresses the policy imbalance between the United States and Canada and considers how this dynamic affects both countries and the Great Lakes regional states through historical and contemporary lenses. In addition, a potentially disastrous but plausible future scenario addresses the detrimental consequences of maintaining the status quo in Washington and Ottawa. This analysis draws on numerous scholarly works and a variety of governmental reports, hearings, and strategies. The examination then turns to federal, state, and local border concerns, as well as institutional capabilities for comparison. Finally, policy recommendations focus each of the primary border players in the Great Lakes region on balancing their various economic and security interests along the shared border.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.005
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.009

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.248 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCalhoun: The Naval Postgraduate School Institutional Archive (Naval Postgraduate School)Same topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207