<i>United States – Countervailing Measures on Supercalendered Paper from Canada</i>, DS505
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The dispute concerns a challenge by Canada of certain countervailing duty measures imposed by the United States on supercalendered paper from Canada. Canada brought multiple claims under the WTO Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM) Agreement, including a challenge of an alleged unwritten measure, pursuant to which the US Department of Commerce (USDOC) applies adverse facts available (AFA) to find countervailable subsidies in relation to unreported programs that were discovered during an investigation. In USDOC subsidy investigations, exporters are asked to report information on the use of specifically identified subsidy programs as well as whether they obtained any ‘other forms of assistance’ (OFA). It is the USDOC's conduct in applying AFA in relation to programs not reported under the OFA question that Canada challenged as an ongoing conduct (the OFA-AFA measure).
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.018 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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".