The implementation of the market access provisions of the Uruguay Round agreement [La mise en oeuvre de l'Accord de Marrakech : le volet accès au marché]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sont examinees en detail les facons dont un echantillon de pays, developpes et en developpement, a mis en place les clauses concernant l'acces au marche a la suite de l'accord sur l'agriculture du cycle de l'Uruguay Round. Des libertes ont ete prises avec les regles initialement etablies, notamment par les Etats-Unis, le Canada, le Japon et l'Australie. Sans etre reellement contestables aupres de l'Organisation mondiale du commerce, ces dispositions sont critiquables et contraires a l'esprit des accords. Sont jugees les performances des differents pays en matiere de transparence des quotas tarifaires et des engagements de droits de douane, de mode de gestion des licences d'importation, de notifications. Globalement, l'Union europeenne a sans aucun doute un bilan plus defendable que nombre de pays de l'echantillon.
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 | 0.012 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".