MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W135985902 · doi:10.1111/caje.12721

Occupational choice, human capital and financial constraints

2024· preprint· en· W135985902 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Rui Castro, Pavel Ševčík

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversité de Montréal
KeywordsProductivityEconomicsProduction (economics)Anticipation (artificial intelligence)Affect (linguistics)Labour economicsHuman capitalDistribution (mathematics)Capital (architecture)Monetary economicsCapital intensityMicroeconomicsMacroeconomicsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We study the aggregate productivity effects of firm‐level financial frictions. Credit constraints affect not only production decisions but also household‐level schooling decisions. In turn, entrepreneurial schooling decisions impact firm‐level productivities, whose cross‐sectional distribution becomes endogenous. In anticipation of future constraints, entrepreneurs underinvest in schooling early in life. Frictions lower aggregate productivity because talent is misallocated across occupations and capital is misallocated across firms. Firm‐level productivities are also lower due to schooling distortions. These effects combined account for between 36% and 68% of the US–India aggregate productivity difference. Schooling distortions are the major source of aggregate productivity differences.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.076 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique→Same topicEconomic Growth and Productivity→French-language works237,207→