Hacia el mercado común norteamericano (Towards a North American Common Market)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El articulo analiza los resultados menguados y menguantes que el Tratado de Libre Comercio de America Latina arroja para la economia mexicana. Destaca como otros proveedores del mercado regional (China y algunos paises del caribe) participan con ventajas similares y desplazan la produccion de Mexico, al tiempo que tienden a absorber una proporcion cre- ciente de la inversion extranjera directa que llega a los paises no desarrollados. Se formula una propuesta de integracion de mayor intensidad: El Mercado Comun Norteamericano, con ventajas visibles para Canada, EUA y Mexico. Clasificacion JEL: F10, F13, F15 Abstract The article analyzes the increasingly poor results that the North American Free Trade Agreement has had for the Mexican economy. It also emphasizes how other suppliers to this regional market (such as China, and some Caribbean countries) enjoy similar advantages to Mexico, and are displacing Mexican products, at the same time as they absorb a growing proportion of direct foreign investment to lesser developed countries. A proposal for a more profound integration process is formulated: The North American Common Market; with visible advantages for Canada, the United States and Mexico.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 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".