MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7100124956

Textile Trade Liberalization: Concerns about Widening Gaps

2005· article· en· W7100124956 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal trade, sustainability, and social impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClothingRedressLimitingOrder (exchange)LiberalizationFree tradeTrade barrierEconomic integrationDeveloping country
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

are wide economic gaps between more developed countries including Singapore and Thailand and less developed ones including Vietnam. The gaps represents one of the largest obstacles to realizing the ASEAN’s goal of market integration and the situation is at risk of getting even worse next year, as it is increasingly likely that the complete liberalization of textile and apparel trade will depress exports from Cambodia and cause its economic growth to plunge. In order for ASEAN to maintain its cohesion, it will become all the more important to take steps to redress disparities among its member nations. Economic Growth to Drop Below 3% Based on the Multilateral Fiber Agreement (MFA) signed in 1974, the US, Canada and the European Union (EU) have maintained quotas limiting the amount of textile products (textiles and apparels) imported from major developing countries. The quotas, however, are to be eliminated entirely by January 1, 2005 according to the rules established by World Trade Organization (WTO). With this, trade in textiles and apparels will be completely liberalized1 and China and India is likely to further

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0130.020
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobal trade, sustainability, and social impact→French-language works237,207→