MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7143298186 · doi:10.65301/ijcd.2020.11.1.2.4

Economic Impacts of Covid-19 Pandemic (Country and Global Perspective)

2020· article· W7143298186 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anetta Čaplánová

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Communication Development · 2020
Typearticle
Language
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicGlobeTollEconomic impact analysisQuarter (Canadian coin)Death tollOutbreakCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pandemic of 2020 caught many by surprise. In spite of regional outbreaks of epidemics with lethal consequences such as SARS or Ebola, for about a century the mankind has not faced such a global pandemic as hit the globe during the first quarter of 2020. However, in the history, there have been other pandemics, which took the death toll of millions of people such as Black Death in 14th century, or the 1918 Fluxxxv, which probably killed more people than the World War I taking place at about the same time (Learn, 2020). The experience shows that during these pandemic periods, mistakes were also made, such as the failure of people to socially distance, which we can learn from even today. During the Spanish flu, the spread of the virus was also caused by the migration of solders during the war. Thus, the past experience also documents that the spread of the virus can be contained by reduced mobility of population, both within individual countries and internationally. However, it is also equally clear that the containment measures aimed to reduce the mobility are also very costly, have substantial consequences on the economy of the country and create recessionary pressures.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Communication DevelopmentSame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207