MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117731233 · doi:10.7202/800814ar

Diversion et création d’échanges commerciaux dans le cadre du système canadien de préférences tarifaires

2009· article· en· W2117731233 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jaleel Ahmad

Bibliographic record

VenueL Actualité économique · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrade diversionSubstitution (logic)EconomicsTariffPreferenceProduct (mathematics)ImperfectCustoms unionTrade creationBilateral tradeInternational economicsWelfare economicsInternational tradeInternational free trade agreementFree tradeMicroeconomicsMathematicsComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores in quantitative terms the potential effects on trade flows as a result of Canadian tariff preferences in favor of the developing countries instituted in 1974. The paper develops a model of trade creation and trade diversion due to preferences based on imperfect substitution, within each product category, between preference-granting, preference-receiving and non-preferred countries. This model depart from the usual assumption of the customs union theory that countries trade in perfect substitutes. The model is then applied to the 1978 trade date under BTN chapters 25 - 99 on a 4-digit classification. One major conclusion of the paper is that the assumption of perfect substitution tends to overstate the magnitude of trade creation and trade diversion, while the method based on less than perfect substitutability seems to offer more realistic estimates of the actual impact of trade preferences.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.131 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueL Actualité économiqueSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207