MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080140542 · doi:10.5539/ass.v4n11p143

Revelation of Three Periods of Japan Economic Development on the Economic Development of China

2009· article· en· W2080140542 on OpenAlex
Shijie Ma, Jian Li

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobalization, Economics, and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaBoomDepression (economics)Great DepressionEconomicsChinese economyDevelopment economicsEconomyPolitical scienceMacroeconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the development stage, the actuality of China economy is very similar to the initial stage of 1970s in Japan, so we can use some feasible experiences to solve economic problems by Japan at the beginning of 1970s. The research to the foam economy in the middle and late stage of 1980s in Japan induces the consideration whether China would follow the same old disastrous road of Japan in 1980s. After that, from the long term depression of Japan in 1990s, we should exactly treat the China depression theory which has been occurred. Reviewing the course from the boom at the beginning of 1970s to the formation and break of foam in the middle and late of 1980s and to the long term depression in 1990s of economic development experienced by Japan, we can get some revelations about many aspects such as macro-economic control and financial security.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.937
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.210 · 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