Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanol?Estamos ante una nueva Gran Depresion? ?Es nuestra crisis economica similar en intensidad a la acaecida en los anos treinta del siglo pasado? ?Es mas severa y sera mas prolongada? ?Que se esta haciendo ahora que no se hizo entonces? Aunque todavia es pronto para obtener respuestas definitivas, economistas e historiadores economicos han comenzado a ofrecernos estudios en los que comparan ambos episodios. Los bancos se han salvado, pero no cumplen la funcion de intermediacion que tienen asignada y la economia no se recuperara hasta que los balances se reconstruyan. Aqui la leccion de los anos treinta todavia no ha sido aprendida del todo. Por otro lado, si vuelve a extenderse el nacionalismo y retrocede la globalizacion –menos comercio internacional, menos financiacion internacional– estaremos en una situacion parecida a la de hace ochenta anos; los desajustes impediran la recuperacion de las economias mas industrializadas y la crisis se prolongara mas de lo cabria esperar. EnglishAre we facing another Great Depression? Is our crisis similar in intensity to that of the 1930s? Is it more severe and will it last longer? What is being done now that was not done then? Although it is still too soon to get definitive answers, economists and economic historians have begun to offer us studies comparing the two episodes. The banks have been saved, but the intermediary function assigned has not been fulfilled and the economy will not recover until balance sheets have been reconstructed. Here, the lesson of the 1930s has not been fully learned yet. Furthermore, if nationalism spreads once again and globalisation recedes –less international commerce, less international finance– we will once again be facing a similar situation to that of eighty years ago; maladjustments will impede the recovery of more industrialised economies and the crisis will drag on for longer than expected.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".