MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391562856 · doi:10.4324/9781003394006-15

The United States Response to COVID-19

2024· book-chapter· en· W4391562856 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katherine Ginsbach

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakVirologyMedicineOutbreakInfectious disease (medical specialty)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On March 18, the US announced that it would close its northern border with Canada to non-essential traffic. On March 20, the US and Mexico agreed to restrict non-essential travel over their shared border for 30 days. On April 20, the United States, Mexico, and Canada announced they are extending restrictions on non-essential travel across the border. On August 9, 2021, Canada reopened the border, and on November 8, 2021, the US reopened the border, each with different restrictions. In the United States, travel restrictions varied by state. 27 states issued executive orders that placed restrictions on out-of-state visitors. Those restrictions included filling out travel declarations, completing a two-week quarantine, and/or proof of a negative test upon arrival. Further restrictions happened within states with municipality governments and tribal governments taking action that was counter to the state and federal orders. This article will analyze the tension that arose in the United States when conflicting orders from different levels of governments come out. How these different restrictions were in tension between protecting the public health and the ill effects that can come with restricting mobility and lessons we can learn to better prepare to respond in the future.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.006

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts→French-language works237,207→