MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331547025

Unasur: The Newest 'Global Player' or Neo-Boliverian Fantasy?

2011· article· en· W2331547025 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicContemporary and Historical Greek Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFantasyEconomicsPolitical scienceEconomic historyKeynesian economicsNeoclassical economicsArtLiterature
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Union of South American Nations (Unasur) presents the most recent vision for trade liberalization and political, economic, and social integration amongst South American countries. Unasur has set 2019 as the year by which it hopes to accomplish many of its goals, such as full regional integration and tariff elimination. But, as 2019 slowly approaches, it remains to be seen whether Unasur will in fact be able to reach these goals. While Unasur’s future is certainly compelling, before heralding Unasur as the long-awaited panacea for pure regional integration, important lessons can be drawn from previous attempts at and iterations of South American regional integration as well as from the model upon which Unasur is structured — the European Union. But what are these lessons, and how do they apply to Unasur? This article will explore the attempts and/or models of Regional Trade Agreements that led up to the creation of Unasur and will then turn to an assessment of Unasur’s successes, failures, the challenges it must face, and an analysis of potential lessons that Unasur may draw from other Regional Trade Agreements.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.012
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.288
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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicContemporary and Historical Greek StudiesFrench-language works237,207