Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper attempts to provide temporary "predictions" about the effects of euro on different regions of the world. European developed countries and ex- communist countries of Eastern Europe are expected to join the euro system eventually. Their important trade partners are the members of the EU and financial integration between them is highly developed. Non-European developed countries such as the US, Canada, Japan, and Australia will not be affected in the short run . But in the long run the rivalry between the US dollar, Japanese Yen and euro may create instability in international monetary system. It is impossible, in advance, to make a prediction about the outcomes of this currency competition. Developing countries' stance against euro is to be determined by three strategic factors. The relative weight of euro in their foreign trade , in their foreign exchange reserves and in their total debt. In he short run, Mediterranean Countries, especially ex-colonies may be affected by euro. The amount of euro which is used to finance their foreign trade may increase and the relative weight of euro in their foreign trade, total foreign exchange reserve anf total foreign exchange reserve and total debt may rise. Of course, all of these predictions depend on the assumption that euro will keep its dependability and will become an international vehicle and reserve currency
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".