MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2161569694 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v2n3p143

Economic Growth Analyses Under the TRIPS Transitions: Evidence from Selected Cross-Country Samples

2010· article· en· W2161569694 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rozilee Asid

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpenness to experienceForeign direct investmentEconomicsTRIPS architectureStock (firearms)Human capitalEndogenous growth theoryInvestment (military)Instrumental variableInternational tradeInternational economicsEconometricsMacroeconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research had identified various determinants in view of growth disparities across nations. In this paper some restriction will be made to the determinants variables and resolved instrumental regression technique. Undoubtedly, the role played by foreign direct investment (FDI), stock of human capitals and countries openness are very significant in achieving higher economic growth. However, when the TRIPS agreements effectively enforced within the WTO framework in 1995, changes in multilateral economic activities were found to be obvious. The partial role played by the intellectual property (IP) to attract FDI as an alternatives channel to improved economic competitions had proven to become a strategic policy to achieve better growth. In this paper, two stages of econometric model will be used. All the selected endogenous variables will be estimated in the first-stage and the partial strength of the selected endogenous variables will then be re-estimated into the growth model in the second stage.

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)0.005
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→