Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".