MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1553332703

BRICs Outward FDI: Dragon Outpaces Jaguar, Tiger, and Bear

2009· article· en· W1553332703 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Markus Jaeger

Bibliographic record

VenueTransnational Corporation Review · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBRICForeign direct investmentChinaJaguarEconomicsIncentiveInternational economicsTigerPoliticsInternational tradeFinancial crisisForeign-exchange reservesDevelopment economicsBusinessMarket economyExchange ratePolitical scienceMonetary economicsMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Economic and financial commentary on Brazil, Russia, India, and China (the ¡®BRIC' countries) generally focuses on these countries' accumulation of foreign exchange reserves, while their outward foreign direct investment (FDI) typically attracts less attention. While FDI from the BRIC countries remains relatively small, its growth potential is substantial. Due to its economic size, rapid economic growth, large external surpluses, and the nature of political-strategic incentives, China has by far the largest outward FDI potential. It will be interesting to observe whether the current crisis leads China closer to realizing its considerable potential.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransnational Corporation ReviewSame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207