Liberal reform, political corruption, and socio-economic impacts in Asia and Eastern Europe
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
How does economic liberalization — or a country’s integration into the global economy — affect its economic performance and the distribution of wealth? There have been heated debates on positive and negative sides of globalization. This article seeks to fill the existing gap in the study of globalization and its socio-economic outcomes by focusing on the mediating effect of political corruption in countries from Asia and Eastern Europe. The authors suggest that, in countries with high levels of corruption, extensive economic liberalization brings faster economic growth. However, the economic growth does not improve the corrupt countries’ distributive justice, increasing poverty and leaving the level of inequality intact after the economic development. On the other hand, economic liberalization in less corrupt countries neither generates fast economic growth, nor significantly improves the countries’ poverty and inequality. The empirical result implies that neoliberal economic reform per se does not have direct impact on a country’s distributive justice. This article studies 40 developing countries from Asia and Eastern Europe.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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.
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