MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparative analysis of domestic and foreign experience in implementing the investment potential mechanism in the system of economic security

2024· article· W7143740667 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 PROFESSORIAL JOURNAL SERIES ECONOMIC SCIENCES · 2024
Typearticle
Language
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicImpulse Buying and Technology Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic securityForeign direct investmentInvestment (military)Work (physics)State (computer science)Mechanism (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article considers foreign approaches to the implementation of the mechanism of investment potential in the system of economic security on the example of such states as the United States, China, Singapore, Germany, France, the Republic of Korea, Japan, and Canada. The purpose of the work is to conduct a comparative analysis of domestic and foreign experience, to assess the possibility of applying certain elements, tools, and methods of foreign mechanisms of investment potential in the Russian economy in the industrial sector in the example of machine-building industry in the framework of economic security of the state. The analysis resulted in proposals for the use of various elements of the mechanism of investment potential in the machinebuilding industry, taking into account the current economic state of Russia in the system of ensuring economic security of the state.

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)0.010
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score0.730

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.273 · 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