MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2367837574

Empirical Research on the International Competitiveness of China' Paper-Making Industry——Based on the Comparison of the Main Trade Exporters' International Competitiveness

2014· article· en· W2367837574 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
WU Ya-y

Bibliographic record

VenueChina Forestry Economics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Trade and Competitiveness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaInternational tradeRevealed comparative advantageIndex (typography)International marketComparative advantageBusinessCompetitive advantageEconomicsInternational economicsIndustrial organizationMarketingPolitical scienceComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From the perspective of international market proportion, revealed comparative advantage index and trade competitiveness index, this article analyzes eight main trade exporters' international competitiveness of the paper-making industry. This paper makes quantitative measure of the international competitive capability of eight main trade exporters by adopting entropy weight in 2000-2011. Then variation trend and intensity of the international competitiveness of China' paper-making industry is evaluated comprehensively. The research result shows that the international competitive advantage has become prominent gradually, and the international competitiveness has been strengthened remarkably. It has surpassed the traditional paper-making powerful exporters, such as Canada, Germany and the United States in 2011. In the post-crisis era, the international competitiveness of China' paper-making industry is in rapid growth stage of development.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChina Forestry EconomicsSame topicGlobal Trade and CompetitivenessFrench-language works237,207