MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Role of Iranian immigrants in Iran - Russia trade development

2018· article· en· W2921196305 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mehdi Afzali

Bibliographic record

VenueRUDN Journal of Economics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in MENA
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationPersianGlobalizationHuman capitalEconomic integrationDevelopment economicsInternational tradePolitical scienceEconomicsEconomyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Migration and international trade are two important dimensions of globalization. Migration plays an important role in development of countries. Immigrants send their remittances, ideas, innovation and investments to their home countries. Migrants can influence on countries’ trade, they are able to decrease the transactional costs for companies willing to trade. In this article has been tried to study the case of Iranian immigrants in Russia. We can see that Iranians have migrated mostly to developed countries such as USA, Europe, Australia, Canada and part of them have migrated to the Persian Gulf countries. And of course many of these immigrants have high levels of economic, human, social, and cultural potential, which can be used for social and economic development of the country. Iranians have migrated to two kinds of countries. First, those who are developed and second those with high income which have the potential of trade with Iran. When we look at these two groups they either migrated to American and European countries, which this group has a high educated and human capital background or they migrated to neighbor Persian Gulf countries that they have mostly strong economic backgrounds which increased the chance of trade. In this article Iranian businessmen have been interviewed and they have explained their roles in trade, and if they had any advantages in comparison with those in the home country.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRUDN Journal of EconomicsSame topicSocioeconomic Development in MENAFrench-language works237,207