MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123196137 · doi:10.1111/apel.12074

Bilateral trade between <scp>C</scp>hina and <scp>C</scp>anada: trends, patterns, and comparisons

2014· article· en· W2123196137 on OpenAlex
SU Fen, Ehsan Latif

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

VenueAsian-Pacific Economic Literature · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsThompson Rivers University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplementarity (molecular biology)EconomicsBilateral tradeInternational tradeInternational economicsBiologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using data from the U nited N ations C omtrade database Standard International Trade Classification Revision III , this study examined major trends of and changes in the bilateral trade between C anada and C hina. It investigated issues related to trade intensities, intra‐industry trade, comparative advantages, and trade complementarity in the two countries. The results showed that there has been a significant increase in bilateral trade between the two countries over the past decade or so. However, the estimated trade intensity indices suggest that C anada and C hina are trading less than they should. On the other hand, analysis using revealed comparative advantage indices suggests that there is no overlap in comparative advantage between two countries. Further, the trade complementarity indices show that C anada's export structure is compatible with C hina's import structure and at the same time, C hina's export structure is also compatible with C anada's import structure. Thus, there is a high potential to increase bilateral trade between C anada and C hina.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.177 · 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