MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389628156 · doi:10.1155/2023/4563552

The Impacts of High-Speed Railway on Urban GDP and Its Agglomeration: Evidence from China

2023· article· en· W4389628156 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mingyuan Li, Fengxiang Guo, Qingqiao Geng, Yuanli Gu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicAviation Industry Analysis and Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
KeywordsEconomies of agglomerationGross domestic productPanel dataEstimationChinaEconomic geographyMainland ChinaPopulationExplanatory powerEconomicsProduct (mathematics)BusinessEconomic growthGeographyEconometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study develops difference-in-differences (DID) models to examine the direct and indirect effects of high-speed railway (HSR) operation on the urban gross domestic product (GDP) and its agglomeration. The period from 2010 to 2019 is selected as the study period, and 30 HSR-operating cities across the Chinese mainland are chosen as the study sites to be investigated. Individual fixed effects and time fixed effects are introduced to panel data models to account for the heterogeneities between cities and the endogeneities of explanatory variables. Estimation results suggest that the operation of HSR can improve the development of the urban GDP by accelerating the migration of population to HSR-operating cities, promoting the upgrading of the urban industrial structure, and improving the level of urban scientific research. Moreover, the level of urban economic agglomeration can also be improved as a result of HSR. However, the ability of HSR-promoting economic development is more significant in cities with more developed economies. Therefore, when formulating a sensible plan for the development of HSR, policymakers should prioritize the construction of HSR in more developed cities.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicAviation Industry Analysis and TrendsFrench-language works237,207