MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4362561151 · doi:10.34260/jaebs.713

The Determinants of Leather Exports of Pakistan: A Gravity Panel Approach

2023· article· en· W4362561151 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Faizan Noor, Aiman Noor Bhutta, Irfan Farooq

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Economics and Business Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGravity model of tradeTariffDestinationsGross domestic productProduct (mathematics)ChinaInternational economicsExchange rateEconomicsBilateral tradeGeographical distanceGeographyBusinessDemographic economicsInternational tradeDemographyMonetary economicsEconomic growthMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study determined the factors that significantly influence the leather sector exports using extended gravity model containing real gross domestic product (RGDP) of Pakistan & trading partner, geographical distance, real exchange rate (RER) and tariff (TOIL) as explanatory variables with the selected top ten Pakistani leather exports destinations Germany, USA, Italy, Spain, U.K, Netherlands, France, Hong Kong, China, and Canada for the period 1991 to 2020. Feasible Generalized Least Square method is utilized to estimate the coefficients of the model. The empirical findings of the study indicate that RGDP of Pakistan and trade partner and RER put out significant positive effect on the leather exports of Pakistan. While, geographical distance and TOIL exercise a significant negative impact on the leather exports. It is recommended that policy makers should try to engage in more trade activities with large economies and must also essay to actively participate in regional trade

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.140 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Economics and Business Studies→Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→