MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2910286530 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v11n2p56

The Economic Determinants of Post-Soviet Belarus: The Role of FDI in Economic Development

2019· article· en· W2910286530 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hong Zhong Fan, Tatsiana Dziavochka, Mathious Willie, Mirza Nouman Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForeign direct investmentEconomicsDeveloping countryGovernment (linguistics)State (computer science)Ordinary least squaresInternational economicsDevelopment economicsMacroeconomicsEconomic growthEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adding to the vast literature readings, this study investigates the role of major determinants of economic development in Belarus from the period of 1992-2017. We employed the simple OLS regression and ARDL Bound testing approach to determine the economic indicators of Belarus. Our findings exhibit that imports and exports have been remained as major determinant whereas, FDI has not been a significant part since last three decades. Belonging to the pool of developing world, FDI has not been a determinant in Belarus while its main emphasis is on exports and imports. This study also implicates the Belarus’ initiative with other developing countries to increase FDI and reduce State-owned Influence. While ensuring the differences with other economies, government must attract the economically suitable FDI avoiding any possible negative effects of FDI on GDP.

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)0.001
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→