MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7043983074

U.S.-Canada Corn Trade Dispute

2006· report· en· W7043983074 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) · 2006
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBushelAgency (philosophy)DisappointmentImmigrationSanctionsTribunalTrade barrierWorld tradeExpropriation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On April 20, 2006, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) issued a final ruling of no injury in an anti-dumping (AD) and countervailing (CV) investigation of Canadian imports of U.S. unprocessed grain corn.The CITT finding reverses an earlier (December 15, 2005) preliminary positive injury finding by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) that had resulted in provisional duties of $1.65 per bushel applied to imported U.S. corn.Following the CITT finding, no further AD/CV duties will be imposed on U.S. corn, and all provisional duties collected following the preliminary CBSA ruling will be refunded.U.S. trade officials, policy makers, and market participants, as well as Canadian corn users, have expressed satisfaction with the CITT ruling.In contrast, Canadian corn growers have voiced disappointment with the CITT ruling and have suggested that they might pursue further trade sanctions against imports of U.S. corn.This report provides background for understanding the U.S. and Canadian corn trade dispute, as well as historical and potential future developments in Canada's investigations of imports of U.S. corn.This report will be updated as events warrant.

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)0.004
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0250.002
Scholarly communication0.0110.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.157 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas)→French-language works237,207→