MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238609773 · doi:10.1108/oxan-db227615

NAFTA withdrawal would have extensive economic effects

2017· other· en· W4238609773 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerald expert briefings · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipNegotiationFree trade agreementAdministration (probate law)LegislationPolitical scienceInternational tradePoliticsEconomicsFree tradeInternational economicsDevelopment economicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Subject Outlook for NAFTA. Significance Representatives from Canada, Mexico and the United States completed the fifth round of negotiations on modernising the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) last month. Most US opinion sees NAFTA as beneficial for the economy, but the administration of President Donald Trump is proposing increasingly unpalatable changes from Mexican and Canadian perspectives. Impacts Political developments in Mexico suggest that it will not cave in to US demands that it considers to be unreasonable. The indirect impacts of NAFTA collapse could be large; supply chain dislocation might raise prices and interest rates, dampening activity. US NAFTA withdrawal could give impetus to other countries' cooperation; Canada and Mexico are part of the ex-US Trans-Pacific Partnership. Trump could lose much public support if he withdraws from the deal, making it much more difficult to pass other legislation. Approaching elections in all three countries in 2018 will add a sense of urgency to the renegotiation process.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score0.426

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0080.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1200.043

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerald expert briefingsSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207