MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995145393 · doi:10.2202/1524-5861.1217

Emerging Countries, Regionalization, and World Trade

2006· article· en· W1995145393 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

VenueGlobal economy journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaInternational tradeEmerging marketsLiberalizationGlobalizationEconomicsEquity (law)Free tradeInternational economicsOrder (exchange)World economyPolitical scienceMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The economic development of emerging countries such as China, India, Brazil, and Russia has serious implications for the multilateral trading system, and for government policies worldwide. This paper explores globalization and regionalization processes in order to assess the effects of trade liberalization on emerging countries. Today, major economic players tend to focus on bilateral and regional agreements. Attention must be paid to how these agreements affect the multilateral trading system and the trilateral world economy. One aspect that stands out from this study is that the role of countries such as China and India, which are reshaping trade patterns, remains to be defined within the Asian regional framework. Equity issues also have an important role to play, both at a regional and at a global level. Consideration of the intersections between the regional and/or bilateral trade agreements of member countries raises interesting questions about the role of trade blocs in the future trajectory of the global economy.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.955

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.175 · 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