MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Foreign Aid, Innovation, and Technology Transfer in a North–South Model with Learning‐by‐Doing

2004· article· en· W1968109345 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Benarroch, James D. Gaisford

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Development Economics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTechnology transferContext (archaeology)Developing countryTransfer of learningConsumption (sociology)Industrial organizationTransfer (computing)BusinessEconomicsTechnology developmentInternational economicsInternational tradeComputer scienceEconomic growthEngineeringManufacturing engineeringArtificial intelligenceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The paper examines foreign aid in the context of a dynamic Ricardian model of trade and development that highlights the role of learning in both the initial adoption of new technologies and products and their eventual transfer from developed to developing countries. When aid is paid as a pure unilateral transfer, the conventional short‐run terms‐of‐trade improvement that results from a home bias in consumption causes harmful delays in the transfer of technology that can lead to mutual immiserization. Conversely, aid that directly or indirectly expedites technology transfer and learning in developing countries can be mutually beneficial.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Development EconomicsSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207