MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6928660424 · doi:10.3886/e223961v2

ECIN Replication Package for "Building the Walls of International Trade after War: Can Dispute Resolution Mechanisms (DRMs) Help?"

2025· dataset· en· W6928660424 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueICPSR Data Holdings · 2025
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSports Science and Education
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDispute resolutionGravity model of tradeTrade barrierReplication (statistics)Free tradeResolution (logic)World trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div> <div> <div> This replication package provides the data, code, and instructions required to reproduce the results presented in the paper titled ”Building the Walls of International Trade after War: Can Dispute Resolution Mechanisms (DRMs) Help?”. The analysis examines how international trade dispute resolution mechanisms (DRMs)—specifically GATT/WTO membership and diplomatic exchanges—affect trade flows between countries with a history of conflict. The empirical analysis employs a gravity model of trade and covers bilateral trade data from 1948 to 2019. </div> </div> </div>

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0020.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.255 · 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