MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1568619192

A Perspective on Future Productivity Growth in Canada

2003· article· en· W1568619192 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Thomas A. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational productivity monitor · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityEconomicsPaceLiberalizationLabour economicsMultifactor productivityTotal factor productivityAgricultural economicsMacroeconomicsMarket economyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the first contribution to the Symposium included in this volume on Future Productivity Growth in Canada, Thomas Wilson of the University of Toronto presents forecasts based on the FOCUS macroeconometric model of the Canadian economy. This model projects labour productivity growth to grow at an average annual rate of 1.7 per cent over the 2002-2025 period. Wilson is somewhat more optimistic, seeing labour productivity growth of around 2 per cent per year. Reasons behind his more rosy scenario include a greater pace of capital deepening due to much slower labour force growth, the realization of productivity gains from past investments in information and communications technologies, a mitigation of future business cycles due to greater use of automatic stabilizers, and continued benefits from trade liberalization.

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0080.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.005
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational productivity monitorSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207