MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7037507904

Emerging Market Fluctuations : What Makes the Di erence?

2012· other· en· W7037507904 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.

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

VenueThe World Bank Open Knowledge Repository (World Bank) · 2012
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Economy and Work Transformation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101LiquationDiafiltrationDysgeusiaFusible alloyHyporeflexiaEmperipolesis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aggregate fluctuations in emerging
\n countries are quantitatively larger and qualitatively
\n different in key respects from those in developed countries.
\n Using data from Mexico and Canada, this paper decomposes
\n these differences in terms of shocks to aggregate efficiency
\n and shocks that distort the decisions of households about
\n how much to invest, consume, and work in a standard model of
\n a small open economy. The decomposition exercise suggests
\n that most of these differences are explained by fluctuations
\n in aggregate efficiency, distortions in labor decisions over
\n the business cycle, and, most importantly, fluctuations in
\n country risk. Other distortions are quantitatively less important.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.276 · 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