MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2961441709 · doi:10.4324/9780429305740-4

Resolving International Trade Disputes: The GATT Multilateral and the Canada-U.S. FTA Bilateral DSM Processes

2019· book-chapter· en· W2961441709 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrew D.M. Anderson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational tradeInternational economicsPolitical scienceBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter examines the procedures that are available under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) for the signatory nations that would prefer a multilateral solution rather than a unilateral solution to the problem of material injury caused by another nation’s subsidy or firms’ dumping practices. It describes the institutional details of dispute settlement that were adopted by Canada and the United States in the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement, with the purpose of assessing how they may impact on the future use of the US trade laws against Canadian producers. The chapter reviews the general trade disputes and the anti-dumping and countervailing duty trade disputes that were taken to the GATT over the 1980—1993 period for dispute resolution by Canada and the United States in order to assess the GATT dispute systems’ effectiveness for resolving trade disputes. The GATT treaty grew out of US and British economic discussions held in 1945.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.659

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.149 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→