The Economic Link between China and North America
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
China’s prosperity may upset others. Will a rising China reduce the growth rate of other countries? We address the question with statistics by comparing the securities market indices of China with those of the United States and Canada. We ask whether the financial markets—East and West—are positively correlated or negatively correlated. We find a moderate positive correlation. This correlation decreases during extreme market circumstances, particularly during market crashes. The correlation becomes closer—we think better for cooperation—during times of improved international cooperation. The correlation diminishes—we think worse for cooperation—when abrupt negative contingencies arise in the global market. The data show that the correlation increased after China joined the World Trade Organization and dramatically decreased after the financial crisis in 2008. Moreover, our lead and lag analysis shows that North America’s markets forecast later developments in China’s market. In general, there is a trend in the positive correlation between the two economies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it