Disciplining Canada's Interprovincial Barriers: The Subnational WTO Approach as Another Option with or beyond an Extended TILMA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper looks at a further option which thus far appears not to have entered the debate on the long-standing issue of interprovincial barriers. Labelled the subnational World Trade Organization (WTO) approach, it is based on the simple idea of seeking the agreement of the Canadian provinces (and WTO members) to extend existing WTO disciplines to the provincial level. This implies that the principles of Most Favoured Nation and National Treatment, as well as of WTO dispute settlement, would apply directly to interprovincial trade in goods and services through the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and that the framework of the General Agreement on Trade and Services would allow for scheduling of commitments, including on labour mobility under mode 4. The Agreements on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures would also apply, as would all other WTO agreements.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".