Una renegociación desconcertante: Cánada, Estados Unidos y México firman una nueva versión del NAFTA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Una cosa es cierta: tras catorce meses de dialogo a veces aspero, la firma del Acuerdo Estados Unidos-Mexico-Canada (USMCA por sus siglas en ingles), que puso punto final a la renegociacion del Tratado de Libre Comercio de America del Norte (NAFTA por sus siglas en ingles) el 1 de octubre de 2018, vino acompanada de cuatro suspiros de alivio: los de los dirigentes implicados. Donald Trump necesitaba una victoria antes de las elecciones de mitad de mandato en noviembre. Durante su campana presidencial habia prometido mejorar o “hacer pedazos” el NAFTA y deseaba poder mostrar resultados antes de intensificar su guerra comercial contra China. El primer ministro canadiense Justin Trudeau, eludido durante la ultima serie de reuniones entre Mexico y Washington, sentia la urgencia de unirse a la mesa de negociaciones antes de que el proceso se fragmentara en conversaciones bilaterales y de que Donald Trump esgrimiera la amenaza de aranceles (...)
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
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".