Border Infrastructure Investment Plan 3.0: Canada - United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2011, the Prime Minister of Canada and the President of the United States issued the Beyond the Border (BTB) Action Plan which included over 30 initiatives aimed at making the CanadaU.S. border more efficient, safe, and secure. As part of this Action Plan, Canada and the U.S. agreed to pursue a border infrastructure initiative. The first element of the initiative was a commitment to making significant investments in physical infrastructure at key border crossings. The second element was an agreement to enhancing binational coordination of border infrastructure investments through the establishment of a binational Border Infrastructure Investment Plan (BIIP). The first edition of the BIIP (BIIP 1.0) was released in May 2013 and focused on the Initial Priority border crossings identified in the BTB Action Plan. BIIP 2.0, completed in December 2014, was expanded to include profiles on 25 major road border crossings and projects at 34 medium-sized border crossings. A section on what is now referred to as the Windsor-Detroit Gordie Howe International Bridge project was included. This edition, BIIP 3.0, features updated profiles on the 25 major ports of entry and updated project information on the 34 medium-sized border crossings. A new section on performance measures has been added, as well as cross-border trade and traffic data for both 2013 and 2014\n
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.006 |
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.
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".