Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Trans-Pacific Partnership, with its twelve participating countries on three continents, is the largest regional trade and investment agreement that Canada has ever negotiated. It is also one of the most controversial— for good reason. Negotiations ended exactly a year ago, in October 2015, and the TPP was signed in New Zealand in February 2016. But there is no guarantee it will ever come into effect.\nOpposition to the TPP is strongest in the United States, where both 2016 presidential nominees vowed to kill or significantly renegotiate the deal. Outgoing President Barack Obama characterized the TPP as a Made-in-America deal in the hope of getting it passed into law shortly after the November presidential election. But is what is good for corporate America good for Canada?\nIn this book, experts in a dozen policy areas explain what the impact of the TPP agreement would be on Canada. Many of the key issues they explore have received little media coverage, notably the effect of the TPP on environmental protection, health care and other public services, Canada's cultural industries, the labour market, human rights and the democratic decision-making process generally. Perhaps most controversially, the TPP would expand the rights of multinational corporations to sue governments for policies and decisions that interfere with their profits.\nMost public commentary on the TPP in Canada has come from CEOs and business lobbyists with a vested interest in furthering a free-trade model that impoverishes democracy and weakens our ability to shape public-interest regulation. The expert contributors to this book, drawn from academia, the labour movement and NGO world, offer an independent and nuanced account of the real but underreported costs of the TPP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".