MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902467282 · doi:10.3390/economies6040064

Contextualizing Narratives of Economic Growth and Navigating Problematic Data: Economic Trends in Ethiopia (1999–2017)

2018· article· en· W2902467282 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEconomic Growth and Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeConsistency (knowledge bases)ChinaAgricultureLoomingDebtEconomyEconomicsEconomic dataPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsMacroeconomicsGeographyComputer sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are common narratives about economic growth in Ethiopia. We analyze four common narratives, namely, that (1) the economy is transforming from agriculture to industry, (2) that national economic growth has been rapid and sustained, (3) that Ethiopia’s economy is largely agricultural, and (4) that there is a looming debt crisis, largely due to lending from China. In many instances, the justification for these narratives is based upon single years or specific data points. We examine these narratives over the long term, to assess if they are supported by available macroeconomic data. In doing so, we encountered significant issues with data quality and consistency. This article presents the available datasets from 1999 to 2017 and concludes that the commonly made claims about the Ethiopian economy are sometimes accurate, sometimes incomplete, and other times inaccurate. We call for greater attention to primary data, and primary datasets, as opposed to relying upon secondary summaries, single years, or specific data points to make generalized claims.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.357
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.255 · 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