Comparative Politics of North America
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
Comparative politics is a subfield of political science that compares the domestic politics of nation-states. In the current era of globalization, comparative politics often overlaps with the subfields of international relations or area studies (studies of a particular region of the globe). The comparative politics of North America, therefore, is the comparative study of the domestic politics of the three North American neighbors—the United States, Canada, and Mexico. It also extends to the politics of North America as a region, especially with respect to trade and economic links, immigration, the environment, and security. In addition, because Mexico is a developing country, while the United States and Canada are developed countries, comparative studies of domestic politics usually focus on US–Canada comparison, while the domestic politics of Mexico are often compared to other Latin American countries or considered as an element in Latin American area studies. The comparative politics of North America is a relatively new topic and has received greater interest since the signing of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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