MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2564387839 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v10n1p172

Role of Stock Exchanges in Economic Development of Uzbekistan

2016· article· en· W2564387839 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Industrial Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStock marketUzbekStock exchangeMarket developmentStock (firearms)Foreign direct investmentBusinessContext (archaeology)EconomicsEconomyMarket economyFinanceGeographyMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper is devoted to study the contemporary role of investments to economic development in the context of Uzbek stock exchange. The comparative analysis of economic development and stock market trends in Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia for the period of 2000-2015 are conducted using documentary analysis, quantitative and qualitative analysis, and other statistical methods of research.The results reveal that Uzbekistan has made notable change in regulation and improvement of investment climate and has stable economic development trends for the studied period. However, Stock market development in Uzbekistan remains weak and recent government effort to accelerate privatization is expected to boost the market and support foreign investments attraction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.185 · 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