MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145943731

Cumbre del G-20: ¿y después de Toronto?

2010· article· es· W2145943731 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnálisis del Real Instituto Elcano ( ARI ) · 2010
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEconomic and Social Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

?Que ha supuesto la cumbre del G-20 de Toronto para la agenda de problemas de la economia global? El Marco para un Crecimiento solido y equilibrado planteado en la cumbre del G-20 en Pittsburgh –que requeria mas ahorro y exportaciones para los paises con deficit exterior (EEUU y muchos de la zona euro) y politicas mas expansivas reforzando las “fuentes domesticas de crecimiento” para los superavitarios (con China y Alemania al frente)– se ha visto sustancialmente modulado en Toronto por las nuevas urgencias de consolidacion fiscal en un grado que dependera de decisiones nacionales o, en su caso, del marco disciplinario de la UE. Las decisiones pretendidamente globales sobre regulacion financiera se aplazan en unos casos y se “devuelven” al ambito nacional en otros. ?Se trata de un acuerdo en “estar en desacuerdo”, simplemente un compas de espera hasta Seul en noviembre con nuevas realidades mas decantadas o de unas dilaciones que refuerzan peligrosas inercias? Entre ellas, la sensacion de que el politics as usual –priorizando las urgencias nacionales– se superpone al business as usual –sin aprender las lecciones acerca de como llegamos hasta aqui– en un marco en que la transferencia de poder desde las economias avanzadas hacia las emergentes se traduce en las correlativas de valores, con revisiones a la baja de las concepciones “occidentales” comenzando por las posibilidades y alcance del “Estado del bienestar”.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.288 · 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