MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797902039

Structural Changes in India's Trade of Pulses: A Markov Approach

2017· article· en· W2797902039 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sanjay Bhyan, H. M. Swamy, Sunita Yadav, Krishan Yadav

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of education and management studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural Economics and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProduction (economics)Markov chainProductivityEconomicsInternational economicsInternational tradeAgricultural economicsDevelopment economicsStatisticsEconomic growthMathematicsMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To access the growth and structural changes taking place in pulses area, production, productivity and trade aspects this analysis was carried out for a period of 10 years ranging from 2007-08 to 2016-17. It was done by calculating compound and simple growth statistics and by developing separate transitional matrix for exports and imports. Results regarding area, production, productivity, collective quantity and value of exports exhibited 1.88 percent, 3.63 percent, 1.71 percent,5.45 percent and 3.23 percent rate of compound growth rate respectively. Markov Chain analysis was attempted through linear programming method to assess the transition probabilities for the major pulses export markets of Indian pulses and nations importing pulses to India. The major Indian pulses export markets were categorized as stable market (UAE) and unstable markets (Pakistan & Saudi Arab) based on the magnitude of transition probabilities. The import transition matrix also brought forward Canada and Myanmar as most trusted and Australia & USA as most unstable suppliers of Indian pulses imports. In conclusion, the growth in production (3.63 %) of the world's largest producer was far behind the simultaneous growth in import quantity (17.12%).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of education and management studiesSame topicAgricultural Economics and PracticesFrench-language works237,207