MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800526948 · doi:10.3138/ijcs.55.08

Canada and the US: Not Necessarily Listening but Tied by Necessity

2017· article· en· W2800526948 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Melissa Haussman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Canadian Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrategistCandidacyRetrainingAcknowledgementPresidential systemService (business)Private sectorActive listeningPolitical sciencePublic relationsPublic administrationBusinessMarketingSociologyPoliticsLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article concerns the US half of the Canadian-US relationship in the medium future. Issues of focus include demographic and economic changes in the two countries and how the Trump presidential candidacy, aided in large part by consultant and former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon, tried to frame both negatively with respect to the US' history of a fairly open economy. Within the next 25 years, the United States, like most of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), will continue to have better job growth in the service industries than in manufacturing ones, necessitating an acknowledgement by both the public and private sectors that significant jobs retraining is necessary. In regard to Canada, this article argues that what is needed is more of a “tweak” to NAFTA, to recognize increased automation and include items like new computerized auto parts not covered in the original agreement, rather than a complete overhaul of the agreement. Canada and the US will still be talking to each other in 25 years' time.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Canadian StudiesSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207