MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1553068311

Common Development Strategies for Asian and Latin American Developing Countries: from the perspective of foreign trade

2009· article· en· W1553068311 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wèi Dān

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of international commercial law and technology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Trade and Competitiveness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLatin AmericansChinaGlobalizationDeveloping countryInternational tradeDevelopment economicsQuarter (Canadian coin)NegotiationPopulationPolitical scienceEconomyEconomicsEconomic growthGeographySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The biggest developing countries in the world in terms size, population and GDP are located in the continents of Asia and Latin America. In these regions, there are also the most emerging-market economies with great potential for sustaining high growth rates in the coming decades (so called the BRICs) like China, India and Brazil. Since the last quarter of the nineteenth century to the present, the major developing countries in Asia and in Latin America, such as China, India, Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Mexico, etc have gone through various stages of development. paper makes an analysis of globalization’s influences, the strengths and weaknesses of the system of WTO, participation of Asian and Latin American developing countries in the negotiations of Doha Round, development strategies to be adopted by these economies and also some important implications for building new balance in international agenda of 21st century.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0140.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of international commercial law and technologySame topicGlobal Trade and CompetitivenessFrench-language works237,207