MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131699632

Intervensi Jerman dalam Opel Bid Talks

2010· article· id· W2131699632 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Veri Agustina

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Global dan Strategis · 2010
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLegal and Labor Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomotive industryGermanSubsidyEconomyGovernment (linguistics)German governmentEuropean unionBankruptcyEngineeringBusinessEconomicsInternational tradeFinanceGeographyMarket economy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By the development of free trade in the world and the European Union, Germany intervene against the automotive industry. The intervention done by given subsidies and the imposition of sales for one of the foreign automotive companies operating in the country. That automotive company is Opel. This General Motors-owned company will be sold by its parent as a result of their bankruptcy. The German Government forced the General Motors to sell Opel to a Canadian company, Magna International. Magna joined the Russian government-owned bank, Sberbank, and the Russian automotive company, GAZ. If the General Motors Opel sold to another party, then the aid of 4.5 billion euros will not be given. With this background it is formed to the formulation of problems answered in this study why did the German intervene Opel Bid Talks on Opel sales? This topic is very interesting because it can be seen from several points of view, such as regional and bilateral relations of Germany. However, in this study, the discussion is more focused on the German domestic economy

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.006

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Global dan StrategisSame topicLegal and Labor StudiesFrench-language works237,207