MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6983370224

Meeting of Mexican, U.S., Canadian Leaders Described as Lackluster

2014· article· en· W6983370224 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUNM’s Digital Repository (University of New Mexico) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRace, History, and American Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)Work (physics)Field (mathematics)Face (sociological concept)Focus (optics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On Wednesday, Feb. 19, President Enrique Pea Nieto hosted his counterparts from the US and Canada for a summit in Toluca, the capital of his native Mxico state.And, as expected, Pea Nieto's meeting with US President Barack Obama and Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper was an uneventful gathering that resulted in no new agreements, at least none that were made public.This has been the case each year since the annual summit was begun under ex-President George W. Bush in 2005 to promote greater economic partnerships and cross-border initiatives (SourceMex, March 30, 2005).The three North American leaders reportedly did not spend much time on issues that have been a source of friction, including the lack of immigration reform in the US and alleged US spying on Pea Nieto (SourceMex, Sep.11, 2013, and Oct. 23, 2013), and Canada's insistence that visas be required for Mexicans visiting that country.Among the positive results of the summit, said some observers, was the renewal of a new bond between Canada and Mexico on economic and energy-related issues and the commitment by the three countries to protect the monarch butterfly.Discussions by the three leaders centered on security, and energy invariably took center stage because of the passage of Mexico's energy reforms and the US-Canadian discussions over the Keystone XL pipeline.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUNM’s Digital Repository (University of New Mexico)Same topicRace, History, and American SocietyFrench-language works237,207