MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3083470638 · doi:10.1111/twec.13026

Effects of the comprehensive and progressive agreement for trans‐pacific partnership

2020· article· en· W3083470638 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Economy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipEconomicsChinaInternational economicsMember statesInternational tradeTrade agreementDeveloping countryFree trade agreementFree tradePolitical scienceEconomic growthEuropean unionLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper uses a numerical multi‐country and multi‐sector general equilibrium model with endogenous trade imbalance and trade cost to simulate the effects of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans‐Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and its future member expansion. Simulation results show that most member countries will benefit from trade integration and that most non‐member countries will lose due to the exclusion effects of the regional trade agreement, but effects for specific countries differ. The entry of the US, China, India and the EU to the CPTPP will significantly increase member countries’ benefits, and their entry will decrease the losses of non‐member countries. The US withdrawal from the CPTPP has a negative effect on the US, which will increase as more countries join. The world as a whole will gain from the trade deal.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.156 · 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