Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we have obtained closed‐form solutions in Cass‐Koopmans growth models with heterogeneous agents. The relationship between the form of the production function and the dynamics of income distribution is made explicit. We then use this relationship to determine what production structure is simultaneously consistent with facts on growth and income inequality. Our empirical findings give support to models with decreasing returns in the reproducible factor. JEL Classification: D3, O1, O4 Dans ce mémoire, les auteurs obtiennent des solutions pour des modèles de croissance à la Cass‐Koopmans dans le cas où les agents sont hétérogènes. On explicite la relation entre la forme de la fonction de production et la dynamique de la répartition des revenus. On utilise alors cette relation pour déterminer quelle structure de production est arrimée aux faits connus à la fois quant à la croissance économique et à la répartition des revenus. Les résultats empiriques supportent les modèles où les rendements sur les acteurs de production reproductibles sont décroissants.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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.
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".