MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2352935821

Agricultural Trade between China and Canada: Structural Features,Competitive Advantages and Trade Complementarity

2015· article· en· W2352935821 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yuan Xiang-zho

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational business · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplementarity (molecular biology)AgricultureChinaInternational tradeEconomicsIndex (typography)Agricultural economicsTrade barrierInternational economicsComparative advantageBusinessGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the growth and structural characteristics of agricultural trade between China and Canada using the concentration ratio(CR), grubel-lloyd index(G-L), trade competitive index(TC), trade complementarily index(TCI), etc. Also analyzed is the change in the competitive advantages and the trade complementarity between agricultural products of China and those of Canada. The results show that:(1) China's imports from Canada account for a main proportion in the bilateral agricultural trade between China and Canada;(2) the fact that China mainly imports land-intensive products such as grain and oilseed from Canada and exports to it labor-intensive products such as animal products and horticultural products, characterized by high trade concentration and inter-industry trade, reflects the characteristics of the two countries' agricultural resource endowments;(3) there is a huge potential for the development of China's agricultural products trade with Canada given the change in the competitive advantages of agricultural products and the increasing trade complementarity.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational businessSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207