MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2917735345

Sluggish global growth depresses prices : global farming

2016· article· en· W2917735345 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Koos Coetzee

Bibliographic record

VenueFarmers' Weekly · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Technological Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)EconomicsVolatility (finance)RecessionChinaPessimismDownside riskGlobal recessionEmerging marketsConsumption (sociology)Investment (military)International economicsMonetary economicsMacroeconomicsGeographyFinancial economics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the third quarter of 2015, the global economy grew by 3,5%. This dropped to 1,9% in the fourth quarter. Weaker economic conditions in China, India and Russia resulted in a sharp decrease in growth in developing economies. Slower growth in the US and Japan resulted in slower growth in developed markets. In the Euro area, growth slowed down slightly towards the end of 2015. According to the European Central Bank, the downside risk to growth in the Euro area has increased. Weaker conditions in emerging markets, increased market volatility and geopolitical risk are the main reasons for the pessimistic outlook. Developing economies are also not expected to perform well. In China, growth moderated to 6,7% in the final quarter of 2015 from the 7,1% achieved in the third quarter. This reflected the rebalancing of the Chinese economy away from investment and manufacturing to consumption. Growth in India plummeted from 10,4% in the third to -1,2% in the fourth quarter of 2015. The recession in Brazil continues.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFarmers' WeeklySame topicEconomic and Technological InnovationFrench-language works237,207