Bidependencia internacional en Ecuador: Estados Unidos y China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La dinámica de las relaciones económicas internacionales del Ecuador se basa en exportar sus bienes primarios de bajo valor monetario e importar bienes industrializados de mayor valor monetario. A través del marco teórico de la corriente estructuralista de la teoría de la dependencia, este trabajo pretende explicar el papel que tiene China como país centro y Ecuador como país periférico en sus relaciones bilaterales como una segunda dependencia. Para cumplir el objetivo de la presente investigación se realiza un análisis documental o no intrusivo, donde se incluyen artículos científicos en revista indexadas Scopus y WoS. Donde se concluye que Ecuador debe seguir una estrategia de desarrollo basada en la generación de un núcleo tecnológico - endógeno. Esto hará que la economía ecuatoriana pase de un ciclo productivo basado en la exportación de recursos naturales a uno manufacturero y de gran valor agregado para la exportación. Esta estrategia de desarrollo podría sacar al Ecuador del círculo vicioso que sufre por su condición de periférico en el escenario económico internacional.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".