MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205020628

Enhancing national innovative capacity: The impact of high-tech international trade and inward foreign direct investment

2016· article· en· W3205020628 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Wu, Zhenzhong Ma, Shuaihe Zhuo

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInnovatorForeign direct investmentIntellectual propertyBusinessProductivityInternational tradeDeveloping countryEmerging marketsInternational economicsInvestment (military)EconomicsEconomic growthEntrepreneurshipFinancePolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Innovation productivity differs across economies and latecomer countries are working hard to close the gap with developed countries. An investigation of 80 countries in the years of 1981–2010 shows that international patenting activities vary across countries. We also find that both high-tech related international export and inward foreign direct investment significantly contributes to emerging countries’ ability to produce cutting-edge technologies, but this effect does not exist for leading innovator countries. Moreover, although this study shows strong intellectual property rights (IPRs) protection is highly correlated with international patenting activities in leading innovator countries, it has a negative impact on emerging innovator countries’ national innovative capacity. The findings thus help better understand the role of international economic activities and IPR in enhancing national innovative capacity, and facilitate emerging countries’ effort to catch up with leading innovator countries.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207