MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3141643668 · doi:10.1163/15691497-12341582

African Continental Free-Trade Area: Key Challenges

2021· article· en· W3141643668 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

VenuePerspectives on Global Development and Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Zones and Regional Development
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFree tradeRatificationFree trade zoneIndustrialisationInternational free trade agreementEconomic integrationInternational tradeFree trade agreementTrade barrierCapital (architecture)Promotion (chess)EconomicsDevelopment economicsGeographyPolitical sciencePoliticsMarket economyChina

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract On March 21, 2018, the African Continental Free Trade Agreement was signed in Kigali, Rwanda by an overwhelming majority of African states. This Agreement, which was designed to create a free-trade area across the African continent, came into force on May 30, 2019, following its ratification by twenty-two African states as provided for in the agreement. The resultant free-trade area is intended to integrate African markets, stimulate industrialization, and engender the economic transformation of the continent through the promotion of free movement of persons, capital, goods, and services across the continent. This article discusses the key challenges facing the new free-trade zone and the prospects of the trade zone for African industrialization and economic development in the twenty-first century.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.181 · 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