The Structure of Factor Content Predictions
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The last decade witnessed an explosion of research into the impact of international technology differences on the factor content of trade. Yet the literature has failed to confront two pivotal issues. First, with international technology differences and traded intermediate inputs, there is no existing definition of the factor content of trade that is compatible with Vanek's factor content prediction. We fill this gap. Second, as Helpman and Krugman (1985) showed, many models beyond Heckscher-Ohlin imply the Vanek prediction. Thus, absent a complete list of these models, we do not fully know what models are being tested when the Vanek prediction is tested. We completely characterize the class of models being tested by providing a familiar consumption similarity condition that is necessary and sufficient for a robust Vanek prediction. Finally, we reassess the performance of the prediction using the correct factor content definition and input-output tables for 41 countries. We find that the prediction performs well except for the presence of missing trade. Further, missing trade is not pervasive: it is associated entirely with 'home bias' in the consumption of agricultural goods, government services and construction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it