Trade configurations in Asia: Assessing de facto and de jure regionalism
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Given the backdrop of significant uncertainties largely propelled by the ongoing trade spat between the United States and China, to what degree can the Asian region move forward in terms of de facto trade integration? Drawing on the new economic geography literature, this paper offers new insights into the literature on trade regionalism in Asia by empirically illustrating how Asian economies can tap into the regional market potential. Specifically, the paper examines the scope for further de facto integration among the Asian countries engaged in the negotiation for the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Agreement by estimating foreign market potential (FMP) indices. To preview the main findings, the empirical analysis demonstrates that the share of intra‐regional trade in total RCEP trade flows and, consequently, the ratio between within‐ and outside‐RCEP trades are significantly lower than what they could potentially be. The paper makes a case that the enhancement of de jure integration among these economies through the RCEP must be accompanied by efforts to improve de facto integration.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it