MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981709494 · doi:10.1177/0027950110373209

Global Prospects and Sources of Economic Growth

2010· article· en· W1981709494 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dawn Holland, Ray Barrell, Tatiana Fic, Ian Hurst, Iana Liadze, Ali Orazgani, Rachel Whitworth

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Institute Economic Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal Financial Crisis and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)RecessionChinaEconomicsGlobal recessionGoods and servicesPaceReal gross domestic productEconomic recoveryTrough (economics)Agricultural economicsEconomyGeographyMonetary economicsMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global output declined by 1 per cent in 2009, but the pace of recovery has been relatively rapid, especially in economies outside the OECD. We estimate that the level of global GDP regained its pre-crisis peak in the first quarter of 2010 (see figure A3 in the Appendix). The volume of world trade in goods and services remained some 6 per cent below its pre-crisis peak in the first quarter, but has rebounded by nearly 10 per cent since the trough reached in the second quarter of 2009 (see figure A2 in the Appendix). China remains a vital source of global demand. GDP increased by 11.9 per cent year-on-year in the first quarter of 2010, while imports of goods in US$ terms rose by more than 60 per cent over the same period. India also bears little scarring from the global crisis and the economy expanded rapidly throughout 2009. Other Asian economies, such as Taiwan, Hong Kong and Korea, have also recovered rapidly from the global recession, expanding by 6.3, 3.3 and 4.5 per cent, respectively, in the second half of 2009. Outside of Asia, Brazil and Mexico have seen a strong rebound in growth, although the level of output in Mexico remains well below its pre-crisis peak.

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)0.003
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.007

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Institute Economic ReviewSame topicGlobal Financial Crisis and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207