MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1954552689

Factors that have shaped the eEvolution of bilateral trade between Canada and Colombia in the long run (1953-2003)

2010· article· en· W1954552689 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
María Victoria Cortés Rodríguez

Bibliographic record

Venuereponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocUR · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBilateral tradeCommodityGravity model of tradePosition (finance)International tradePopulationOrder (exchange)GeographyEconomicsInternational economicsDemographyChina
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently bilateral trade between Canada and Colombia is low. In 2003, this trade amounted to US $489 million, with Co­lombian imports from Canada totaling US $ 213 million (DOTS, 2004). Canada supplied approximately 4.0% of Colombia’s total trade (total imports and total ex­ports), in contrast Colombia supplied only around 0.1% of the Canadian total trade. In 2005, Colombia was the third largest Canadian partner in South America after Brazil and Venezuela. The objective of this paper is to analyze the trade performance between Canada and Colombia using a modified gravity equation to identify the most relevant historical factors that have shaped the evo­lution of this bilateral trade in the long run (during the period from 1953 to 2003). The analysis includes traditional economic va­riables (such as population and income of the importing and exporting countries). In order to understand the qualitative nature of the evolution of this bilateral trade the second objective is to review the evolving nature of trade including commodity com­position and trade characteristics.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuereponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocURSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207