MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139866482 · doi:10.5430/bmr.v2n4p38

Sino-Japanese Agricultural Trade Friction Analysis and China’s Countermeasures

2013· article· en· W2139866482 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jie Lin, Yunfeng Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness and Management Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureChinaInternational tradeGovernment (linguistics)BusinessTrade barrierComparative advantageEconomicsPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the growing volume of Sino-Japanese agricultural trade, the agricultural trade friction between China and Japan has never stopped. In the good Sino-Japanese economic and trade development, the agricultural trade friction has always bothered the further improvement of Sino-Japanese economic and trade relationship. A great amount of Chinese agricultural products are exported to Japan, which benefits Japanese citizens to a great degree. However, due to the weak international competitive advantage of Japanese agriculture, Japan is bound to exaggerate the issue of agricultural protection. In this paper, authors give a brief review of the evolvement of Sino-Japanese agricultural trade friction, analyze the causes from three aspects, namely Japan, China, and international world, and finally put forward countermeasures for coping with Sino-Japanese agricultural trade friction respectively from three levels, namely the Government, agricultural association, and agricultural export enterprise.

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)0.002
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.179 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness and Management ResearchSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207