Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Canada’s trade relations with the UK have been governed by the CETA since the signature of that agreement with the EU in October 2016. Subsequent to the decision of the UK electorate to leave the EU, it became necessary to envisage the creation of a new trade agreement directly between the UK and Canada. Initially, the Government of Canada indicated a willingness to negotiate a new trade agreement with the UK as quickly as possible. But, as the future relationship of the UK to the EU became increasingly uncertain, the Government of Canada decided to hold back until greater clarity could be obtained. As of July 2020, Canada was still waiting. The future trade agreement will reflect the desire of both countries to maintain their long-standing and close relationship. Both have strong interests in trade and investment with the other and both will seek to reinforce these interests. The particular concerns of both countries are outlined in this paper and the outlines of a future trade agreement are set out. In conclusion, the author suggests that it would be in the interests of the UK, rather than seeking simply a bilateral agreement, to seek to negotiate an Atlantic Free Trade Agreement, thereby clarifying its relations not simply with Canada but with all of Europe and North America.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".