MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2573390739 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v9n2p122

Limits to Trade Growth: Decomposing Manufacturing Trade

2017· article· en· W2573390739 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. Ataman Aksoy, Francis Ng

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsChinaMarket shareInternational economicsInternational tradeValue (mathematics)Developing countryEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper decomposes manufacturing import growth rates in 5 large industrial and 8 large developing countries and measures the relative contributions of domestic demand and market share changes for 1986/87, 1991/92, 1996/97, 2001/02, 2006/07 and 2011/12. Imports as a share of domestic value added has increased significantly over this period and account between 70 to 80 percent of import growth during this period. Exports from developing countries and especially China account for the bulk of this increase. China is an exception to this development and its import shares have not increased and have actually decreased during the last period. Finally future trade growth rates are going to decrease. We show that most of the early growth of trade was caused by trade liberalizations from almost closed economies and initial import shares were very low so that small changes led to high trade growth rates. Now that the market shares are already very high, it is almost impossible to replicate similar growth rates.

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)0.009
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.244
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

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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