MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exchange Rate Regimes and Foreign Direct Investment Flows to Developing Countries

2012· article· en· W1571259682 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of International Economics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersEconomic and Social Research Council
KeywordsForeign direct investmentDeveloping countryEconomicsDe factoExchange rateInternational economicsGeneralized method of momentsEstimationExchange-rate regimeMonetary economicsPanel dataMacroeconomicsEconometricsEconomic growthPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Drawing on recent advances in exchange rate regime classifications, the paper examines empirically the effect of exchange rate regimes on foreign direct investment (FDI) flows to developing countries. Using system generalized methods of moments estimation on a panel of 70 developing countries for the period 1985–2004, we find that developing countries adopting de facto fixed or intermediate regimes significantly outperform those opting for a flexible exchange rate system in attracting FDI flows. No statistically significant differences in the FDI‐inducing properties of fixes, intermediates and floats are found using the International Monetary Fund official classification.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.227 · 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