Which One is More Efficient? German or Japanese Automobile Industry: A Meta-frontier with Technology Gap Comparison
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this paper is to compare the cost efficiency of the automobile industry in Germany and Japan during the period of 1980–2014 by applying the Meta-Frontier Cost Function. Despite the constant competition and the global automobile industry crisis during 2008-2010, only a few existing studies compare the efficiency of the industry cross countries. However, these all fail to address various types of technology adopted and the environment faced by automakers across countries. The meta-frontier model became a recognized and useful tool to evaluate technical efficiency of firms applying dissimilar technologies. Overall, the results signify that the cost efficiency of the German automobile industry by average is better than that of the Japanese one and the German one uses more superior production technique though it was lower the Japanese one in the 1980s. The difference reversed in the 1990s and has been enlarging since the 1990s to the end of the observation period.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it