CETA on investment:the definitive surrender of eu law to gats and NAFTA/BITS
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Provisions on investment in the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the EU, both on substance and on dispute settlement procedures, are the culmination of a long process of replacement of the original EEC approach to establishment by the approaches followed by the GATS, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs). The article analyses this process; it focuses in particular on the law of external relations but takes into account the evolution of the law of the internal market and can also be read from this perspective as, in the authors’ opinion, the evolution in the former throws light on the latter. The article intends to leave the legal facts to speak by themselves. By unveiling their rationale, it also gives rise to political concerns regarding the evolution of the law. As CETA limits the ability of the EU to legislate and erodes the ECJ’s role, the article leads to the conclusion that the underlying rationale for the evolution, both in the internal and the external areas, has not been that of promoting integration but that of deregulation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it