MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W66405729

APEC: Looking for Optimal Decisions to Support Economic Growth, Trade and Employment

2014· article· en· W66405729 on OpenAlex
Elizaveta Safonkina

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Organisations Research Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Political and Economic Relations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSummitPolitical sciencePresidencyEconomicsEconomic integrationPoliticsRegional integrationEconomic growthInternational tradeGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elizaveta A. Safonkina - Researcher at the Research Center for International Development Assistance of the International Organisations Research Institute, National Research University Higher School of Economics; 20 Myasnitskaya, 10100, Moscow, Russia; E-mail: esafonkina@hse.ruThe Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC) is one of the key platforms of the multilateral dialogue on global agenda issues in the Asia-Pacific region. Notwithstanding its regional character, the annual APEC leaders` summits significance is comparable with that of the key global governance institutions, such as the G8 and G20, summits. With increasing integration and enhanced economic relationships as well as established interaction pattern the APEC influence on regional and global economic agenda is growing. In spite of the fact that APEC initially positioned itself as a “free group of economics” not a political association, the member states step-by-step turn to the most acute worldwide political issues, which is reflected in the leaders` statements made during the summit. The analysis of the APEC 2013 summit which was held within the Indonesian presidency on 7-8 October 2013 on Bali provides an insight into the main drivers of the APEC agenda. Given that currently all countries face similar economic and social challenges: low and stalling economic growth, need to pursue fiscal consolidation, persistent structural unemployment, widening income disparities, base erosion and profit shifting as well as tax evasion, climate change negative consequences etc, it`s useful to analyze the measures implemented at the regional level (APEC), as well as the global level (G20). A comparison with the G20 is largely determined shared challenges and by the intersecting memberships: almost half of the members of the institutions participate in both fora, namely Australia, Canada, China, Indonesia, Japan, Mexico, Republic of Korea, Russia and the United States. The recent APEC and G20 agendas aim to coordinate actions to resolve the shared problems and move towards new growth models. The analysis is based on the key summit documents - Bali Declaration “Resilient Asia-Pacific, Engine of Global Growth”, Joint Ministerial Statement, leaders` statements and accompanying documents. The analysis permits to identify the vector of APEC agenda development.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.334 · 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