MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2860001346 · doi:10.22215/cria.v5i0.1317

Perspectivas Locales ~ NAFTA in Southern Mexico: An Economic Godsend or Curse?

2018· article· en· W2860001346 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCarleton Review of International Affairs · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Cultures and Socio-Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPovertyNegotiationCurseFree trade agreementEmigrationPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsInequalityFree tradeEconomic growthGeographyInternational tradeEconomicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was adopted with the hope that the accord would bring economic growth to Mexico, reducing poverty and social inequality. It is now 24 years later, and these development goals have not been achieved. Using primary source interview material from indigenous people of southern Oaxaca, along with a review of the literature and quantitative data, this article contends that NAFTA has contributed to an increase in rural poverty, regional disparities, and the emigration of campesinos from their native communities. With NAFTA 2.0 negotiations underway, this paper advocates that the voices of indigenous people should be heard at the negotiating table. Their insight on how the trade deal has impacted southern localities is of critical importance moving forward.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.341 · 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