MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989833433 · doi:10.5771/9783845291666

Constructing Trade

2019· book· en· W2989833433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sophie Schram

Bibliographic record

VenueNomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG eBooks · 2019
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)Order (exchange)PoliticsFederalismPublic administrationPosition (finance)ProcurementEconomyBusinessEconomicsManagementLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This discourse analysis examines the trade policy interests of the province of Quebec during the CETA negotiations between Canada and the EU (2006–2014). The negotiation of the agreement’s chapters ‘Public Procurement’, ‘Foreign Direct Investment’ and ‘Agriculture’ from Quebec’s perspective documents that the provincial government drew upon existing repertoires of ideas in order to develop Quebec’s interests in a complex transatlantic setting and advance them skilfully. Canadian federalism as well as economic, political and cultural development discourses provided the framework for interpreting current and historical events, and for forging alliances to assert the province’s position. This study is based on the systematic quantitative analysis of parliamentary debates in Quebec and the qualitative evaluation of structured interviews with members of government, civil servants, business associations and NGOs.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0160.012
Scholarly communication0.0120.007
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.004

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG eBooksSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207