MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311997392 · doi:10.7765/9781526170514.00015

The Trade Policy Review Mechanism

2022· book-chapter· en· W4311997392 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Asif H. Qureshi

Bibliographic record

VenueManchester University Press eBooks · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorld Trade Organization Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationInternational tradeOrder (exchange)International economicsPolitical scienceTrade agreementCommercial policyBusinessEconomicsLawFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most exciting of the developments that has emerged in the institutional sphere from the Uruguay Round of Trade Negotiations is the focus on ensuring closer adherence by members to the WTO code through the newly created Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM). The Uruguay Round Mid-Term Review agreement establishing the TPRM was arrived at in Montreal, Canada, by the Trade Negotiations Committee at Ministerial level in December 1988. The criterion for the assessment of a member's foreign trade regime under the TPRM is the impact a member's trade policies and practices make on the multilateral trading order. The agreement is not very transparent with respect to the criteria for the review. A fortiori, the agreement on the TPRM can only refer to economic and/ or legal criteria. Indeed, this was the understanding of the negotiating group.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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