Special Summit of the Americas — Monterrey, Mexico, January 2004: Background, Objectives, and Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Special Summit of the Americas held on January 12 and 13, 2004, in Monterrey, Mexico was the first meeting of all democratic heads of state from Latin America, the United States and Canada that are members of the Organization of American States (OAS) since the Quebec Summit in April 2001.At the Monterrey Summit, leaders discussed broad issues affecting countries in the hemisphere at length, such as free trade and corruption.Their primary accomplishment, however, was to renew their commitments to implementing the Quebec City Summit Declaration and Plan of Action by issuing the Declaration of Nuevo León.Rather than adopting numerous new initiatives, the declaration focuses on achieving a few measurable objectives.Those objectives include halving the cost of sending remittances by 2008, endorsing the Inter-American Development Bank's goal of tripling credit for small and medium-sized businesses by 2007, and fighting corruption by denying safe haven to corrupt officials and their assets.The Fourth Summit of the Americas will be held in Argentina in November 2005.One of the major themes that will be discussed at the next Summit is employment in the hemisphere.This report will not be updated.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.005 |
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".