La coopération politique bilatérale entre le Canada et les États-Unis dans le secteur énergétique : l'harmonisation des normes de fiabilité reliées au transport de l'électricité
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Do domestic variables matter in a context of bilateral cooperation? What factors positively influence the decision-making process in the case of a policy harmonization between two countries? By studying both countries' institutional differences and governmental and non-governmental actors' preferences in the energy sector, this research analyzes the bilateral cooperation between Canada and the United States regarding the creation of the Electric Reliability Organization. Although domestic institutional constraints are important to consider, I argue that both physical and economic market integration and the use of a non-governmental organization by central governments have facilitated the success of the cooperation process. Those factors have favored the convergence of decisional actors' preferences and the inclusion of the majority of actors from all sectors of the industry into the process. The analysis uses a sequential model implying the division decision-making process over foreign policy into specific stages to show the importance of domestic variables. Key words: Governmental cooperation, bilateral relations, actors' preferences, institution, energy sector, electricity, transmission network, reliability standards, market integration, restructured electricity market.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".