MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035280760

IMF Programs and Economic Growth in the DRC: Documentation, Impact and Prospects

2020· preprint· en· W3035280760 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matata Ponyo Mapon, Jean-Paul K. Tsasa

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyCurseCorporate governanceQuarter (Canadian coin)WonderDocumentationPolitical scienceGood governanceNothingEconomicsEconomic policyDevelopment economicsBusinessFinanceLawSociologyPoliticsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the end of 2012 the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has suspended its financial assistance to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Due to inflationary pressures which occurred in the last quarter of 2016, several decision-makers called for a reopening of a formal cooperation with the IMF. This process was formally completed in December 2019. The restart of IMF programs was greeted with satisfaction by politicians and widely commented in the media. However, recent history shows that the DRC managed to achieve exceptional economic performance, between 2012 and 2016, without being in a formal cooperation with the IMF. Some people wonder whether IMF assistance is a curse for recipient countries? We argue that the underlying problem has nothing to do with accepting or not the IMF assistance, but rather in the ability of policy makers to establish effective leadership and good governance for the development and implementation supporting structural reforms.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0140.039
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207