MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2902557908 · doi:10.5539/ass.v14n12p192

Economic Growth of Saudi Arabia Between Present and Future According to 2030 Vision

2018· article· en· W2902557908 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hanaa Abdelaty Hasan Esmail

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in MENA
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueProductivityEconomicsValue (mathematics)Production (economics)Econometric modelAgricultural economicsBusinessEconomic growthMacroeconomicsEconometricsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Saudi Arabia follows a development strategy depending on many factors generating income, such as increasing non-oil investments, production and manufacturing for exports. Investing contributes mainly to diversify sources of income and generate more jobs where it is expected that the contribution of the private sector will enhance productivity in all sectors. These increased business productivities will increase the percentage annual growth rate to 5.2% in addition to increasing the added value of the oil sector. Saudi Arabia implemented a lot of policies to be out of the oil control on their economies and this is taken up in the previous papers of growth factors in Saudi Arabia until 2014. But due to the need of less dependence on oil revenues and the need to diversify sources of income, especially in the period following the drop-in oil prices, it’s necessary to create added value to the economy of Saudi Arabia, through an econometric model that illustrates oil alternatives income. This paper is based on the analysis of different growth factors after exclusion of oil revenues using the Weighted Least Square.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicSocioeconomic Development in MENAFrench-language works237,207