MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035207811 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v4n11p40

Economic Growth, Regional Savings and FDI in Sub-Saharan Africa: Trivariate Causality and Error Correction Modeling Approach

2012· article· en· W2035207811 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rexford Abaidoo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEconomic Growth and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBivariate analysisCausality (physics)EconometricsEconomicsCausal inferenceForeign direct investmentCausationGranger causalityInferenceCausal modelError correction modelMacroeconomicsCointegrationStatisticsMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Empirical studies examining the dynamic causal relationship between key macroeconomic variables using varied forms of bivariate causality methodology abound in the macroeconomic and finance literature. Causal inference based on such bivariate causality approach however, has been criticized for its inherent likelihood to draw causal inference or attribute causation to variables in scenarios where an omitted variable might have a better claim; Lutkephol (1982), Umberto Triacca (1998). This study is modeled to reduce this inherent weakness by employing trivariate causality methodology through error correction approach. Using aggregate data on Sub-Sahara Africa spanning the period 1977 to 2010, this study finds joint uni-directional causal relationship running from FDI and Gross Regional Savings growth to regional GDP growth. Empirical results further document additional uni-directional joint causal relationship stemming from GDP growth and Gross Regional Savings to growth in FDI inflow into the sub-region.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicEconomic Growth and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207