MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791324140 · doi:10.16980/jitc.14.1.201802.23

The Opportunity Cost of the U.S. Withdrawal from the TPP: A CGE Approach

2018· article· en· W2791324140 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jong-Hwan Ko

Bibliographic record

VenueKorea International Trade Research Institute · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputable general equilibriumWelfareGeneral partnershipEconomicsOpportunity costInternational economicsInternational tradeGeneral equilibrium theoryMacroeconomicsFinanceMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this paper is to quantify the opportunity cost of the U.S. withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal signed by Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnamy comparing the likely economic effects of the TPP with those of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) without the United States, for which a global computable general equilibrium model is used. The opportunity costs of the U.S. withdrawal from the TPP for not only the United States and the CPTPP 11 members but non-members of the TPP are measured in terms of real GDP, equivalent variation (EV) as a measure of welfare, export and import values, and trade balance. In particular, the simulation results reveal that the opportunity costs that the United States has to pay for its withdrawal from the TPP would be a loss of real GDP of 0.76% and a loss of welfare of $107 billion,which is supported by a decrease in its total exports of 8.43% and a decrease in its total imports of 6.31%.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.250
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.076 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKorea International Trade Research InstituteSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207