Taking Stock, June 2012 : An Update on Vietnam's Recent Economic Development
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 authorities' determined \n implementation of stabilization measures over the past year \n has helped to avert a macroeconomic crisis. If the \n deterioration of the macroeconomic environment in 2010-11 \n was rapid, the improvement in the situation in the past \n twelve months has been equally swift. Regaining \n macroeconomic stability has been costly, but not stabilizing \n the economy would have led to even bigger losses. Real gross \n domestic product (GDP) growth has decelerated from 6.8 \n percent in 2010 to 5.9 percent in 2011, and further to 4 \n percent in the first quarter of 2012 as higher prices has \n lowered domestic demand, affecting sectors such as \n construction, manufacturing and utilities. Industrial \n production has slowed, inventory for key industrial products \n has accumulated, and a number of small and medium \n enterprises have either closed, been liquidated or \n temporarily suspended their operations. While the \n stabilization efforts may have contributed to a cyclical \n slowdown, Vietnam's trend growth rate has been on a \n downward path for the last 5-6 years, largely on account of \n the slow pace of structural reforms. Inefficiencies in \n state-owned enterprises, banks and public investments have \n been a drag on the country's long-term growth \n potential. With gains from macroeconomic stabilization still \n recent and fragile, especially in an external environment \n that is fraught with uncertainty, the government needs to be \n careful not to shift to an expansionary stance prematurely.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.187 | 0.003 |
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