MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7037549611

THE EFFECT OF COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON U.S. BEEF EXPORTS TO ITS MAJOR TRADING PARTNERS

2024· article· en· W7037549611 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenSIUC (Southern Illinois University Carbondale) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHistorical Astronomy and Related Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicPer capitaChinaGross domestic productCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)SeasonalityExchange ratePosition (finance)Real gross domestic product
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyzed the effect of COVID-19 on U.S. beef exports to South Korea, Japan, China, Mexico, and Canada between June 2017 and July 2023. After accounting for potential factors influencing exports, the study finds that the pandemic’s impact was different in both magnitude and persistence among major trading partners. The drop in exports to Japan and Mexico were notable during the pandemic. The decline in exports began early in the year for Mexico and in March for South Korea. Exports to Canada on the other hand both increased and decreased during this period. Exports to China followed a different pattern and increased during the first six months of the pandemic. Exports to all major export markets recovered as the effects of the pandemic eased by the end of May and fully recovered to pre-pandemic levels by the end of the year. Post-pandemic export volumes have been steady in all major markets amidst the seasonal fluctuations except for Mexico. A confluence of factors including the per capita GDP of the importing country, the exchange rate, trade agreements, time trend, and seasonality influenced U.S. beef exports during the study period. In conclusion, the study reveals the complexity of bilateral trade and importance of accounting for other confounding influences when measuring the impact of the pandemic on U.S. beef exports.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.739

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenSIUC (Southern Illinois University Carbondale)Same topicHistorical Astronomy and Related StudiesFrench-language works237,207