MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922485283 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v11n4p1

The Determinant of Bilateral Trade in the East African Community: Application of the Gravity Model

2019· article· en· W2922485283 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ambetsa Wycliffe Oparanya, Kenneth P. Mdadila, Longinus Rutasitara

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Dar es Salaam
KeywordsGravity model of tradeDiasporaBilateral tradeContiguityEconomicsGravity equationIndex (typography)Foreign direct investmentInternational economicsLanguage changeInternational tradePopulationEconomic geographyGeographyPolitical scienceMacroeconomicsDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the determinants of bilateral trade flows within the East African region using the Gravity model approach. Using a 40 year data obtained from the World Development Institute’s data base, the Random Effects model is applied to empirically determine the variables that drive bilateral trade within the region. The findings suggest that country size, contiguity, diaspora remittances and corruption index have a positive impact on the regions bilateral trade. On the other hand, foreign direct investment flows, net population effects and mobile subscription ratio have a negative impact on intra-trade flows among member states. Although not exhaustive, the study offers useful insights for policy makers to seek measures to spur the EAC intra-trade flows.

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)0.004
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicGlobal trade and economicsFrench-language works237,207