MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7100847818

RBC Financial Group

2005· article· en· W7100847818 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonetary policyPoliticsParallelsFinancial stabilityPolitical stabilityInterest rateInterest groupFinancial market
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

by DAVID LAIDLER Abstract: The economic integration of North America, unlike that of Europe, has no parallels on the political front, and U.S. economic and political interests are world-wide, while those of Canada and Mexico are predominantly regional. These facts have important implications for the degree of policy integration, not least in monetary matters, that is feasible within NAFTA. Each member has an interest in the monetary stability of the others, but a common currency- even a pegged exchange rate system- is not desirable without a significantly greater degree of labour market integration than currently exists, and without a willingness on the part of the U.S. authorities to subordinate national to regional interests in their policy making. Absent these pre-conditions, monetary stability within NAFTA is best achieved by each country pursuing its own domestic stability, while maintaining the current high degree of formal and informal communications about economic conditions and policy intentions implicit in current arrangements.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score0.560

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6080.627

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 head0.275
Teacher spread0.262 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCanadian Policy and Governance→French-language works237,207→