Germany's role as a trader in services: Difficult factfinding and uncertain prospects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The author sheds a light on the overall importance of Germany's recorded service trade, in particular by pointing to the differences of various regions in goods and service trade for Germany. He reveals that German service trade comprises about a fifth of its total trade with no substantial change since 2009. Despite these supposedly low dynamics, Germany is among the world's leading traders of services whereby unreported trade is large. Travel accounts for a quarter of total German service imports thus driving the German trade deficit in services for a large part. It is furthermore analyzed that the EU goods market is of much higher importance than the EU service market for exports as well as for imports. The author also shows that there are strong trade links between Germany and the US in services, in particular when buying services from the US with a focus on services in the financial services and in the IT sector. In contrast, Asia has not yet emerged as a similarly important export and sourcing market for services as for goods. The author proposes to strengthen German competitiveness in services trade by completing the EU single market for services and providing incentives for foreign investors.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".