and the North American Free Trade Agreement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During 1993 a shrill public debate over the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) took place in the United States. The idea of negotiating one or more bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) had initially been raised by the Reagan administration in the early 1980s. The dual intent of proposing these agreements was to lower barriers to trade with important U.S. economic partners and to build pressure for multilateral reforms under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). After a delay of several years, an Israel-U.S. agreement developed relatively quickly and was approved by Con-gress in May 1985. The multilateral Uruguay Round GATT negotiations were launched subsequently (September 1986), and a bilateral agreement with Can-ada was approved in September 1988. Mexico proposed developing a FTA with the United States in May 1990. The GATT negotiations were stalled, but entering into a bilateral trade agreement with Mexico was more controversial than the previous agreements with Israel and Canada. Nevertheless, the United States embraced negotia-
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.009 |
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".