Bibliographic record
Abstract
national, and international initiatives and solutions, keeping the border "working" for both states.With globalization, even people who live far from the border in the United States and Canada cannot escape its effects on their security, prosperity, and health.Borders matter not just to those who live in the borderlands, but to those who live well beyond the border as well.However, the outcome of this bilateral cross-border cooperation reflects a compromise of ideals, sovereignty, and pragmatism, one that is frequently managed from a position of indifference.Instead of focusing on security at the joint border, the United States and Canada have taken a continental approach to building a comprehensive security system around common interests related to the border, as manifest in policing, counterterrorism, intelligence, and defense to detect, disrupt, and deter threats (Hataley and Leuprecht 2019).Ultimately, borders form part of larger borderland regions, not just physically between neighboring countries, but also at international airports, seaports, customs warehouses, and embassies, which are considered part of the borderland region because they perform quintessential border practices.These include such tasks as preclearance and issuing visas, in complex policy and governance systems that weave together both border functions and politics.This book thus problematizes borders beyond their mere geographic position at the edge of one state and the beginning of another.Canadian borders, particularly those located at the perimeter or beyond the continent, are access points to a larger shared North American
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.072 | 0.046 |
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".