Particularity of Canada-Mexico bilateral relations (from beginning to entry into force NAFTA Agreement)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article is devoted to the particularity of Canada-Mexico bilateral relations in the period from their beginning to signing and entry into force the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). It is noted that from the time of first contacts bilateral relations between two countries have developed unevenly with periods of increase and periods of decline. It is determined that in the history of Canada-Mexico relations before signing NAFTA can be identified four main periods. The first one is a period of early contacts that lasted from the end of XIX century to the establishment of the official diplomatic relations between Canada and Mexico in 1944. In this period of time ties between the two countries were extremely weak. The second period lasted from 1944 to the end of the 1960s. This period clearly shows the limits of cooperation between Canada and Mexico after the establishment of the official diplomatic ties, but it is also possible to see a certain coincidence between the values and diplomatic strategies of these countries. The third period of Canada-Mexico relations lasted from the beginning of the 1970s to the end of the 1980s. During this period, both Canada and Mexico try to diversify their foreign policy and strengthen the organizational mechanism of mutual cooperation. But it is also shown that despite the warm political rhetoric, there was some distance in Canada-Mexico relations. The fourth period of the relations lasted from the late 1980s until the NAFTA treaty came into force in 1994. At that time Canadian and Mexican governments began to give priority to economic relations over political and diplomatic ones. It was revealed that the main influencing factors of bilateral relations between Mexico and Canada were the impact of third countries, especially the United Kingdom and the United States, regional and global economic conditions, and the attitude to the bilateral relations of the political elites of both countries.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".