MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W37460555 · doi:10.30541/v50i4iipp.471-490

Green Growth: An Environmental Technology Approach.

2011· article· en· W37460555 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Pakistan Development Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanel dataIntellectual propertyEnforcementForeign direct investmentEconomicsEstimationInvestment (military)Generalized method of momentsRandom effects modelEconometricsMacroeconomicsPolitical scienceMeta-analysisPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research is focused on achieving green growth through an environmental technology approach. Developing environmental technology we examined four elements considering the enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPRs), research and development (R&D) expenditures, the size of the market capture by GDP and most importantly the environmental taxations. This study includes the 11 developed countries which are Austria, Australia, Canada, France, Japan, Finland, Germany, Sweden, U.K and U.S. Technology change can be better handled by panel data than by pure cross-section or pure time series. It can minimise the bias if we used the aggregate individuals or firms. Estimation techniques depend on short panel or long panel. This study used the Pooled Least Square estimation techniques like Fixed Effect Model (FEM) and random effect model (REM) for both balance period of 2000-2005 and unbalanced period from 1995-2005. The study concluded the policy formulation in making developed‘s climate resilient economies. JEL classification: O34, F19, L24 Keywords: Intellectual Property Rights, Foreign Direct Investment, Technology Licensing

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.171 · 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