MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2593343743

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GLOBALIZATION AND MILITARY EXPENDITURES IN G7 COUNTRIES: EVIDENCE FROM A PANEL DATA ANALYSIS

2016· article· en· W2593343743 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tsung‐Pao Wu, Fan Dian, Tsangyao Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueECONOMIC COMPUTATION AND ECONOMIC CYBERNETICS STUDIES AND RESEARCH · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDefense, Military, and Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobalizationCausality (physics)Granger causalityPanel dataEconomicsDevelopment economicsEconomic globalizationDemographic economicsInternational economicsMacroeconomicsEconometricsMarket economy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the causal linkages between military expenditure and globalization in G7 countries (i.e. Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, and the USA) by analyzing data for the period 1988-2011. Panel causality was examined to explain dependency and heterogeneity across countries. The results of one-way Granger causality show that globalization influenced military expenditures in Germany, and Japan. Moreover, there was no evidence that military expenditures caused globalization in any G7 country. The evidence from Italy shows interaction causality between globalization and military expenditure. Bootstrap panel Granger causality tests show that the causality between globalization and military expenditure varies across countries with different conditions. The findings of this study could provide important policy implications for the G7 countries under study.

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)0.004
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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.290
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.109 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueECONOMIC COMPUTATION AND ECONOMIC CYBERNETICS STUDIES AND RESEARCHSame topicDefense, Military, and Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207