MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1001904992

Convergence tendencies in the EU Member States - a statistical study for the period 1980-2013

2014· article· en· W1001904992 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Izabela Młynarzewska-Borowiec

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Economics and Finance · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvergence (economics)European unionConvergence clubsClubEconomicsEconometricsAccessionInternational economicsMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the article is empirical analysis of convergence process in the European Union especially after extending it by the groups of less developed countries („cohesion” countries after their accession in the 1980s and Central and Eastern Europe countries after 2004). The econometric methods, based mainly on regression growth models, are implemented, first of all, to verify the hypothesis about the existence of beta convergence and its impact on sigma convergence; secondly, to verify the theoretically proved statement that capital accumulation become less important in convergence processes as compared to the increasing role of technological progress. The results of the investigation point at the existence of beta convergence and its important but decreasing impact on reducing income disparities among European Union Member States. An additional survey on the existence of convergence clubs, conducted using the approach based on polynomial functions, , confirms, that all the analysed countries were approaching the same steady state and creating a common convergence club. JEL Classification Code: G10, G15.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Economics and FinanceSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207