MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010699421 · doi:10.35974/isc.v6i1.1258

Footwear Trade Industry: An Analysis of Export Strategy Based on Indonesia Main Export Destination

2018· article· en· W3010699421 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Darwin Simanjuntak, Francis Hutabarat

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Trade and Competitiveness
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaBusinessExploratory factor analysisExport tradeExport performanceInternational tradeGeographyEconomyMarketingEconomicsService (business)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to identify the factors affecting footwear trade industry in Indonesia based on Indonesia’s main export destination. Understanding these factors could help leaders in the trade industry to plan their strategies better and further research on footwear trading. A set of data was obtained from Badan Pusat Statistic (BPS) based on the data from Indonesia’s footwear main export destination namely: United States, China, Belgium, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, Netherlands, Korea, Italy, Australia, Mexico, France, Canada, Denmark, Singapore, Brazil, Hong Kong, Russian Federation, Chile, Argentina and other countries. Exploratory factor analysis was used to identify the underlying dimensions of countries as Indonesia main export destination. The result of the study showed that the sample size was adequate for the analysis and the communalities of all the variables were more than .4; therefore, all the variables were useful in the model. Since, the variables were identified in a factor of 0.7 or more, the result showed that all factors based on Indonesia’s main export destination which was from the years 2012-2016 contributed to the exports of footwear in Indonesia.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobal Trade and CompetitivenessFrench-language works237,207