Canada: The Pacific Alliance and the search for its meaning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Pacific Alliance (PA) has only been in existence for eight years, but in this short time, it has shown itself to be one of the most serious efforts in the region to project a solid institutional framework that will allow progress towards full trade integration, not only with its member countries but also with other areas of the continent and the world. The objective of this paper, and in light of the Canadian government's current policy of diversifying its external markets, is to analyze the impact, if any, of an ventual agreement with the Pacific Alliance on the Canadian export of goods. To this end, a theoretical approach of the type of regionalism presented by the Pacific Alliance will be carried out, as well as the objectives clearly indicated in its 2011 charter and the first Additional Protocol of 2016, which contains specific provisions with a view to the creation of a free trade area. In addition, the evolution of Canada's commitment at the time of expressing its interest in this alliance of Latin American countries will be analyzed. This will be followed by an examination of the trade balances and basket composition of the top twenty-five products between Canada and PA member countries. The period for Peru and Colombia will be from 2001 to 2018; for Chile and Mexico, the analysis will cover the period from 1997 to 2018. The purpose of this comparative study is to determine, on the one hand, whether, from the perspective of the exchange of goods, PA countries represent a real opportunity for Canada; and on the other hand, to explore if this grouping of nations provides new relevant elements that stand out from the existing agreements that Canada has in force with each of them.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".