MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1503894887 · doi:10.3386/w20551

How Do the "GATS-Plus" and "GATS-Minus" Characteristics of Regional Service Agreements Affect Trade in Services?

2014· report· en· W1503894887 on OpenAlexaff
Nianli Zhou, John Whalley

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2014
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNational Office for Philosophy and Social Sciences
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)BusinessTrade in servicesGeneral Agreement on Trade in ServicesInternational tradeService (business)International economicsEconomicsFree tradePsychologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Preferential liberalization of trade in services is a central feature of the new regionalism."GATS-Plus" and "GATS-Minus" have become the distinctive characteristics of the service RTAs and this paper aims to investigate and distinguish the different effect of the "GATS-Plus" and "GATS-Minus" components of RTAs on the service trade .The results of the empirical research by using the gravity equation either with time-varying exporter and importer fixed effects or with the specific exporter and importer fixed effect and year fixed effect both indicate : (1) belonging to a RTA (both "only goods" RTA and "service" RTA) can increase the bilateral service trade between the trading-pairs significantly.(2) almost all the "GATS-plus" and "GATS-neutral" commitments either on market access or on national treatment made by trading-pairs with each other under service RTAs have significantly positive effect on bilateral service export.(3) the commitments of "GATS-minus" characteristic do not have significant negative effects on bilateral service export because "GATS-minus" treatment can be neutralized to some extent by two main preferential erosion mechanisms under the RTAs: "liberal rule of origin" and "non-party MFN provision".

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.396
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.022 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic Research→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→