MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120167057

The Global Economy and the Euro Area: Weak International Trade, Robust Domestic Demand: DIW Economic Outlook

2019· article· en· W3120167057 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claus Michelsen, Guido Baldi, Geraldine Dany-Knedlik, Hella Engerer, Stefan Gebauer, Malte Rieth

Bibliographic record

VenueDIW Weekly Report · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Development and Digital Transformation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsBrexitChinaInternational tradeEuropean unionInternational economicsQuarter (Canadian coin)PoliticsExternal tradePolitical scienceGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current global economic environment remains harsh. Global growth rates stagnated in the fourth quarter of 2018, particularly affected by foreign trade. DIW Berlin’s forecast indicates global economic growth of 3.7 percent for 2019 and 3.6 percent for 2020. Positive stimuli are expected from catch-up effects (in the European automobile industry, for example) and the continued positive development on the labor markets, which will support consumption. However, the outlook for international trade is dominated by trade conflicts, political uncertainties, and a weaker Chinese economy. Although the trade conflict between the USA and China is beginning to ease, there are signs of a dispute between the USA and the European Union over EU automobile and car part exports to the USA. In Europe, the possibility of a no-deal Brexit and the political situation in Italy are causing uncertainty. Against this backdrop, monetary policy is likely to be expansionary in the forecast period.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.006

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.188 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDIW Weekly ReportSame topicEconomic Development and Digital TransformationFrench-language works237,207