Impact of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals on the Comprehensive Progress of the United States, México, and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, we describe the impact of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals on the integral progress of the United States, México, and Canada, which brings multiple benefits to all institutions, communities, and individuals in the mentioned countries, which since 1989 had signed a free trade agreement (NAFTA), now replaced by a new commercial treaty (USMCA) entered in operations in 2020. The United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs established 17 Sustainable Development Goals in 2015, whose scopes are projected to be fulfilled before 2030. Among the 17 compared objectives, only two, the Goal-1 (End poverty in all its forms everywhere), and Goal-4 (Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all) showed significant differences (p-value=0.012, and 0.001 respectively) via an analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the average achievement % distribution per Goal between countries. We hope that this essay can contribute in some way to the awakening of consciences for sustainable development.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".