MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087674752 · doi:10.7202/017653ar

The Culture of the WTO: Why it Needs to Change

2008· article· en· W2087674752 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueEurostudia · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorld Trade Organization Law
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnanimityDeadlockInstitutionLiberalizationPoliticsInvestment (military)Law and economicsSimple (philosophy)Settlement (finance)ResizingPolitical scienceProcess (computing)International tradeSet (abstract data type)EconomicsEconomic systemBusinessLawFinanceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

WTO works like any institution following a set of rules and regulations. The article traces this “culture” since its beginnings in the framework of GATT sixty years ago. Even though some of its elements like for example the Dispute settlement mechanism (DSM) are considerable achievements, the present deadlock of the Doha round reveals the need for reform. Various modifications are necessary like for example the abandon of the principle of unanimity in its decision-making process, an enlargement of its agenda from simple liberalization issues to real development politics and the regulation of financial markets and international investment.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.234 · 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