Equality and multilateral financial cooperation in the Americas
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper explores the concepts of interpersonal, inter-firm, and interstate equality embedded in three contending visions for the evolution of international financial links within the Western Hemisphere. The free market- oriented regional financial project of the United States envisions extension of a NAFTA-like regulatory framework throughout the hemisphere. It promises Latin American citizens better financial services and their firms greater access to U.S. and Canadian loans and investment, in exchange for U.S.-style legal protections for foreign banks and (implicitly) for dramatically reduced financial policy space for Latin American governments. Venezuela’s vision of “Bolivarian” finance, exported to some of the circum-Caribbean and upper Andean region, promotes assertive state management vis-à-vis both foreign and domestic investors, populist redistribution, and increasing reliance on non- market financial transactions. It emphasizes equal credit access for poorer citizens and government retention of national financial policy space, but downplays the need for predictable financial regulation and property rights. Brazil’s regional financial project would unite South America through creation of continent-wide physical infrastructure and capitalist financial markets, while retaining an on-going role for public sector banks responsive to central government priorities. Brazil’s approach shares with the Venezuelan vision an emphasis on Latin American governments’ need for financial policy space, and with the U.S. vision a concern for regulatory predictability and financial deepening.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it