MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Agro‐Food Preferences in the EU's GSP Scheme: An Analysis of Changes Between 2004 and 2006

2008· article· en· W2064174945 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

VenueDevelopment Policy Review · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMargin (machine learning)Ranking (information retrieval)ChinaValue (mathematics)International economicsDeveloping countryBusinessMarket accessInternational tradeEconomicsAgricultural economicsGeographyAgricultureEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the extent to which the 2006 revisions to the EU's Generalised System of Preferences improved market‐access opportunities for developing‐country agro‐food exports. It shows that they resulted in only a slight increase in the percentage preferential margin, but that there has been a significant increase in the value of preferential trade and of the preferential margin enjoyed by exporters. This was accompanied by changes in the ranking of beneficiaries. Countries such as China, Brazil, Argentina, India and South Africa maintained their significant shares of GSP agro‐food exports, but other countries such as Thailand and Vietnam have now emerged as major GSP beneficiaries.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.188
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.087 · 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