MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Development of the Regulation of International Trade

2022· book-chapter· en· W4311883887 on OpenAlexaff
Donald McRae

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorld Trade Organization Law
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational tradeObligationScope (computer science)Regional tradeInternational economicsMultilateralismRetrenchmentBusinessWorld tradeRules of originFree tradePoliticsEconomicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract International trade regulation based on agreement and the MFN principle has developed from bilateral FCN agreements to a multilateral arrangement under the GATT with diverse ancillary decisions, understandings, and agreements, to its modern form of comprehensive multilateral agreement under the WTO. A critical part of trade regulation has been the role of dispute settlement where under the WTO the Appellate Body became the authoritative decision-maker on the scope or ambit of the obligations under the WTO agreements. However, since the WTO, preferential trade agreements have proliferated at the bilateral, regional, and plurilateral levels, often deepening the areas of obligation from those under the WTO or expanding to new areas not covered by the WTO agreements. Most recently, this has taken the form of a mega-regional arrangement, the TPP, transformed into the CPTPP, characterized by the number of parties and the size of markets and coverage of areas not found in the WTO or other trade agreements, and without a constitutional role being granted to dispute settlement. The future of international trade regulation, given the present economic and political conditions, is uncertain. The comprehensiveness of mega-regulation is a model, but a reinvigoration of the WTO is unlikely. Retrenchment to traditional bilateral or small-scale regional forms of regulation of much narrower scope cannot be ruled out.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicWorld Trade Organization LawFrench-language works237,207