MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W212129686

Trade openness in North America: The impacts of NAFTA

2012· article· en· W212129686 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohammed Dawood

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Collective Bargaining in the Academy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational tradeOpenness to experienceBusinessInternational economicsEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this paper is to examine the impacts of the creation of NAFTA on trade openness in the North American region as a whole. We first assess these impacts of on NAFTA on individual member countries- namely, the United States, Canada and Mexico. Then we explore the impacts of NAFTA on North America as a bloc. Towards our goal we develop an empirical model that includes several independent variables to control, among others, for productivity, inflation, capital formation, per capita income, monetary policy and the existence of NAFTA. We collect annual time series data on all variables from 1981 to 2010 from the World Bank's World Development Indicators (WDI) and the United Nations' Comtrade databases. Findings suggest that NAFTA has had a positive and significant impact on promoting trade, both at the regional and individual levels. Thus the decision makers in NAFTA member countries should pursue their efforts to (i) eliminate or harmonize their tariffs, and (ii) implement legislations that promote or facilitate the flows of goods and services within the region.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Collective Bargaining in the AcademySame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207