Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conceived in an era of rapid post-Cold War economic liberalization, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), signed in 1994, brought together Canada, Mexico and the United States with the aim of creating a regional trade bloc that eliminated the friction and costs of trade between the three nations. <br><br>Without an overarching institutional framework, NAFTA never sought to attain the levels of integration achieved by the European Union - for many it was a missed opportunity - and never quite fulfilled its potential as a single market. And under Trump's administration a trilateral trade agreement has become increasingly precarious. <br><br>This book provides an overview of NAFTA and its successor the USCMA, explaining the theory behind the politics and economics of trade in North America. It offers an accessible and concise analysis of the key provisions, shortcomings and past revision efforts of the governments involved. <br><br>At a time of increasing protectionism and heightened awareness of trading relationships, the book highlights the lessons to be learnt from the fraught history of one of the largest trade blocs in the world.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".