Analysis of the pursuit of Mexico's foreign direct investment objectives, through the signature of bilateral and multilater agreements
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is a key element in achieving progress. In a world with increasing competition for capital, it is mandatory for countries to develop different mechanisms to attract FDI. Mexico is an example of a developing country that in recent years has greatly benefited from FDI. This trend results from this country's development of a number of mechanisms on both the domestic and the international scene promoting this type of investment. Along with the investment openings being fostered on the domestic scene, Mexico has been conducting international efforts to reach FDI objectives. It has entered into a number of Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) as well as Bilateral and Regional Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). The most important goals achieved by this country encouraging the reception of FDI are the preferential trade agreements signed with the two biggest markets in the world, North America and the European Union. Mexico's participation in the WTO represents one of its efforts to establish lateral ties to achieve its FDI objectives. The fact that there is a relationship between trade and investment has been established.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it