East Asia Update, October 2003 : From Cyclical Recovery to Long Run Growth
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The region had already begun a cyclical \n recovery in 2002, but this was partially side-tracked by \n SARS - Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome - and other shocks \n in early 2003. East Asian growth fell to only 3 percent in \n the second quarter of 2003. On balance, though, the impact \n of SARS was less than first feared, and growth projections \n for 2003 remain unchanged, compared with six months ago. Far \n from too little growth, China is in the midst of a powerful \n boom that has policy makers looking for ways to cool the \n pace of expansion in some sectors. On the other hand, export \n growth in most East Asian countries, slowed in the summer, \n and in some has yet to revive. These conflicting signals \n obscure somehow the near term outlook, but, on balance, \n prospects for East Asia are getting brighter. If the \n momentum of reform can be maintained, the region should be \n well placed to convert cyclical recovery into more \n sustained, long run growth. There are four sets of reasons \n for optimism: the global economy is improving, continued \n strong growth in China is propelling a vast expansion in its \n imports from the rest of East Asia, post-financial crisis \n " fire-fighting " seems to be behind, with \n domestic conditions in the region improving, and, the region \n is becoming more comfortable with representative forms of \n governance. However, two dangers deserve special attention: \n international trade is the life blood of East Asia, but the \n setback at the Cancun trade talks, might allow protectionist \n interests to go on the offensive, causing long term damage \n to the world trading system; and, within East Asia progress \n on institutional, and governance reforms has been slow, \n evidently hurting its competitive position in the world. \n Several priority policies are suggested, namely prudent \n macroeconomics, continued emphasis on strengthening \n financial sector supervision and regulation, corporate \n governance, and the supporting legal and judicial framework \n for the financial, and corporate sectors, as well as \n fostering the development of more diversified capital \n markets, to better handle different kinds of risks. The \n report also looks at the prospects for economic growth in \n the region, its poverty incidence, and at a more supportive \n international environment, pointing at improved confidence, \n demand, and activity, underpinned by supportive monetary, \n and fiscal policies adopted by many countries. Domestic \n trends and policy challenges convey gradual improvements in \n the financial sector, more active capital market \n development, improved corporate governance, and political \n transitions in several countries in the region.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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 it