MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1969764694 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v5n10p201

Behavioural Pattern of FDI Inflows: Autoregressive Study

2012· article· en· W1969764694 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rahul Singh, Himani Chaturvedi, Faraji Kasidi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign direct investmentOrder (exchange)Investment (military)Real estateGovernment (linguistics)BusinessAutoregressive modelEconomicsEconometricsMacroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study investigates on the behavioral pattern of sectoral foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows in Indian economy for the period 2002-2010. Thirteen sectors of the economy as categorized by the Government of India are used for the study. Econometrics tools of analysis are applied. In particular the study uses Autoregression of Order One denoted as AR (1). The study seeks to explain behavioral pattern of FDI inflows. The study uncovered that Telecommunications and Construction sectors exhibited explosive behavior. Housing and Real Estate and Automobile sectors exhibited non-stationary behavioral pattern during the period. However, some sectors viz electrical equipment including Computer Software and Electronics; Transportation Industry; Chemicals (other than fertilizers); Drugs and Pharmaceuticals; Food processing industries; Cement and Gypsum products and Metallurgical industries have exhibited stationarity. Also the study exposes foreign investors’ biases in choosing some sectors in relation to other sectors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.297
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.078 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Business Research→Same topicMonetary Policy and Economic Impact→French-language works237,207→