MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3192870791 · doi:10.17762/converter.64

Cross-country Comparison of Grain Processing Manufacturing Export Technical Complexity and Its Influencing Factors

2021· article· en· W3192870791 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhenjun Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueCONVERTER · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Technological Innovation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsChinaBusinessSample (material)Spillover effectRanking (information retrieval)Modernization theoryAgricultureProduction (economics)International tradeAgricultural economicsEconomicsEconomic growthGeographyComputer scienceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The result of measuring the technical complexity of China's and OECD countries' grain export based on houseman's export technical complexity model shows that there are 10 countries with high technical complexity of grain export, with the United States, Canada and Australia in the top three, 9 countries with medium and 16 countries with low export technical complexity. In 2019, the technical complexity of China's grain exports was US$ 890, ranking 34th among the sample countries, with an average increase of 28% during the sample period. Upgrading the level of agricultural modernization, expanding the scale of grain production, and Manufacturing technology spillover are conducive to increasing the technical complexity of export.

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)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCONVERTERSame topicEconomic and Technological InnovationFrench-language works237,207