MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3004281522 · doi:10.5539/ass.v16n2p22

The Aftermath of the Tariff War on China

2020· article· en· W3004281522 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nicholas Bitar

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTariffEconomicsTrade warChinaWelfareUnemploymentProductivityKeynesian economicsMonetary economicsMacroeconomicsInternational economicsMarket economyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Will the US sustain its economy after the tariff war with China, or will the economy regress? This paper offers a conceptual framework, based on the tenets of New-Keynesian theory, to answer this question. I anticipate that the tariff will have a positive effect on the GDP of the US economy in the short run while prices will rise. When adding the most recent reforms of interest cut by the Fed to 1.75% in September (2019) the model concludes a better outcome. Followed by an expansionary monetary policy by reducing the interest rate, the aftermath of the tariff war on China seems to have a positive impact on the US income and productivity. Obviously, some critics to the Trump Administration indeed shed light on the curtailed global and US social welfare that is caused by the inflationary effect of the tariff war, in addition to the deteriorating conditions for some trading sectors in the US which would certainly lead to unemployment. But the benefits to the US economy that are translated by the New-Keynesian theoretical framework show a positive impact on US production, employment, and 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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.173 · 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
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social Science→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→