MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1570298119

The Source of Economic Growth in OECD Countries: A Review Article

2003· review· en· W1570298119 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Martin Neil Baily

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational productivity monitor · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsProductivityPer capitaInvestment (military)Human capitalDiversity (politics)Government (linguistics)Development economicsInternational economicsLabour economicsEconomic growthPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In early 2003, the OECD released a major report entitled The Sources of Growth in OECD Countries. In the seventh and final article, Martin Neil Baily from the Institute for International Economics, and former Chairman of the U.S. Council of Economic Advisers reviews the report. Baily notes that key findings include: the diversity in GDP per capita growth across OECD countries, largely reflecting differences in labour utilization; the importance for growth of exposure to international trade, sound macro policies and investment in physical and human capital; and the high returns to growth from business sector R&D activities, in contrast to a lack of any positive effect from government R&D. Baily observes that the report fails to discuss ways to improve employment growth, concluding that combining full employment with high productivity is the key challenge currently facing policymakers.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.016
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational productivity monitorSame topicRegional Development and PolicyFrench-language works237,207