MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235736272 · doi:10.1108/oxan-db225496

Prospects for the global economy in 2018

2017· other· en· W4235736272 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEmerald expert briefings · 2017
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityEconomicsInternational tradeInternational economicsCommodityBalance of tradeInflation (cosmology)BusinessEconomic policyFinanceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Subject PROSPECTS 2018: Global economy Significance Global GDP growth is likely to edge higher in 2018 as trade, investment and employment expand. However, monetary policy is gradually tightening, fiscal expansion is limited and there is little chance of a repeat of the surprise boost from trade seen in 2017 or a recovery in productivity. Inflation may remain obdurately low in the United States, Japan and the euro-area but not sufficiently to deter the US Federal Reserve (Fed) and the ECB from gently reeling in their bond-buying programmes. Modestly higher commodity prices should support economic recovery in resource producers. Impacts The timing of elections in the United States, Canada and Mexico may prolong the NAFTA trade talks into 2019 or beyond. China will battle any US attempts to constrain its innovation and access to technology, which it sees as key to its rebalancing. Technological progress and more open markets exacerbate the unpredictability of jobs and wages, but policy will increasingly address this. Automation means the job intensive low-cost industrial growth engine is now less effective; developing countries must consider new models. A better balance of power between multinationals, international organisations and governments will be key to global tax cooperation.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEmerald expert briefingsSame topicRegional Development and PolicyFrench-language works237,207