Bibliographic record
Abstract
Une diminution de l'ampleur des cycles économiques s'observe dans la majorité des pays industrialisés, y compris le Canada. Parmi les hypothèses avancées pour expliquer ce fait, il y a les chocs exogènes moins importants, le passage d'une économie de biens à une économie de services, la meilleure gestion des inventaires, la déréglementation du marché financier et l'amélioration des politiques monétaire et budgétaire. J'étudie ces hypothèses appliquées au cas du Canada et cela ne me permet pas d'affirmer que l'une ou plusieurs d'entre elles soient entièrement responsables de la baisse de volatilité des cycles économiques canadiens. Toutefois, les résultats que j'obtiens de l'étude de l'ouverture de l'économie aux marchés extérieurs suggèrent que ceci a contribué pour beaucoup dans l'explication de la baisse d'ampleur des cycles économiques canadiens. ______________________________________________________________________________ MOTS-CLÉS DE L’AUTEUR : Macroéconomie, Cycle économiques, Volatilité, Canada, Explications.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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.
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".