MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2257124928

Canada-United States Trade Policy beyond North America

2010· article· en· W2257124928 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elliot J. Feldman, Cyndee Todgham Cherniak, James P. Mcllroy, Donald B. Cameron

Bibliographic record

VenueCanada-United States law journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational tradePolitical scienceHistory of the United StatesEconomicsLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

MS. CHERNIAK: Good afternoon.I am going to talk about Canada's trade policy with respect to the Americas, but from a legal point of view, not from a government or government relations point of view.There is a document that can be located on the trade website entitled Seizing Global Opportunities, a Global Commerce Strategy for Securing Canada's Growth and Prosperity. 1 It's about a fifteen-page document.It does not say very much, but you can go look at it at your leisure.It does say that the Canadian government is going to support Canadian companies who are engaged in global commerce, which is your bread-and-butter-type of comment for companies that are selling or investing abroad and have formed partnerships with sup-* Cyndee Todgham Chemiak is counsel in the International Trade Law, the Business Law and the Tax Law Groups in Lang Michener's Toronto office.She represented the Government of China, Chinese Associations and/or exporters in the three of the first four anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases against China and the first China specific safeguard case initiated by Canada against outdoor barbeques from China.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0170.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.241
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

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
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanada-United States law journalSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207