Bibliographic record
Abstract
IntroductionThe history and status of Canadian bilateral relations, business, and trade with Cuba have been a source of some controversy in the United States.Not long ago, I participated in a series of debates-at times heated-before U.S. audiences on the subject of Canadian opposition to the Helms-Burton Act of 1996.1 Those gatherings were prompted by a comparatively rare impasse in political and international legal discourse between the United States and Canada, along with other key allies and trading partners, for which Cuba-with or without Castro-served more as a lightning rod, rather than the core focus for a more general and protracted disagreement on the subject of extraterritoriality.' In the latter context, it is useful to recall that, well before lightning struck over Cuba, Canada felt compelled to enact general blocking legislation as a tool to render business actors under Canadian jurisdiction at least as miserable complying with the purported extraterritorial reach of any U.S. laws so designated as they might otherwise have been in breaching them.Only later was this tool enlisted specifically in defence of growing trade with Cuba.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.075 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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 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".