MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1916381477 · doi:10.14201/alh.2092

Las Historias de un Tratado Comercial

2009· article· es· W1916381477 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sofía Jaso García

Bibliographic record

VenueAMÉRICA LATINA HOY · 2009
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Relations in Latin America
Canadian institutionsNortel (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatin AmericansPolitical scienceTreatyHumanitiesPoliticsLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RESUMEN: ¿Cuáles son las razones que han favorecido un tratado de libre comercio en América del Norte? El artículo sugiere algunos de los intereses políticos y económicos inmersos en la negociacián. Como Canadá ya tiene su propio acuerdo con los Estados Unidos, su objetivo fundamental será evitar que México logre beneficios que pudieran perjudicarle. Para México, por su parte, el tratado puede ser la alternativa para recuperar el crecimiento económico, mientras que para Estados Unidos es una opción para mantener su competitividad frente a Europa y el Sudeste Asiático, y para reorientar sus relaciones con América Latina.ABSTRACT: Which are the reasons that are leading to a free-trade treaty in North America? The article suggests some economical and political interests involved in the negociation. As Canada has it's own agreement with the US, it would try to be ahead of Mexican benefits in the dkaL From Mexico's viewpoint, the treaty may be the alternative to restore economical growth, and for the US, it could be an option to mantain it's competitiveness against Europe and Southern Asia, and to reorientate it's relations with Latin America.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0080.014
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.316 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAMÉRICA LATINA HOYSame topicInternational Relations in Latin AmericaFrench-language works237,207