Draft chapter for North America in Question: Regional Integration in an Era of Economic Turbulence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mexico it was clear the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) had died a quiet death. While the ―Three Amigos Summit ‖ had survived the transition from U.S. President George W. Bush to Barack Obama, with Obama meeting in Guadalajara with his counterparts Stephen Harper and Felipe Calderón, the SPP had disappeared from their agenda. The only apparent reference to the SPP was the word ―process ‖ in the last sentence of the summit declaration: ―We will continue to work through this North American Leaders ‘ Summit process, in an inclusive and transparent manner, for the common benefit of the people of Mexico, Canada and the United States (North American Leaders 2009, our emphasis). One telling indication of the loss of commitment to this process was the solemn declaration on the official U.S. government SPP website (www.spp.gov) that ―this website is an archive for SPP documents and will not be updated. ‖ With this statement, a process that had begun four years earlier with high hopes of deepening North American integration through wide-ranging multi-sectoral regulatory harmonization, seemed to grind to a halt. 2
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.004 |
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".