Comparative Assessment of Growth Sustainability of Germany, France, United Kingdom, and United States between 2000 and 2010
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The results presented in this article are part of a broader experimental research focused on the examination ofgrowth sustainability that is conducted through inequation ΔТ − ΔР ≤ ΔS conclusively developed on the basis ofseparate researches. This article examines growth sustainability of Germany, France, United Kingdom, and UnitedStates using time series data between 2000 and 2010. We built the inequation based on a simple initialsuggestion that any country’s economy benefits from balanced development between the needs of currentgeneration and future generation. Inequation is based on three elements: ΔP, or population surplus and publicspending dynamics is calculated for the purposes of reflecting the needs of current generation, ΔT, ortechnological surplus reflects the necessary strategic investments dynamics in economic growth of futuregeneration, ΔS, or savings surplus as one of the most important components of sustainable growth of any country,is evaluated towards equilibrium of two other components. The article presents and analyses results of a broadseries of calculations of all collected time series data. The results allowed us to conduct the sustainability testingand we analyzed dynamics of the sustainability elements. The article offers comparative assessment ofsustainability of given countries. The conducted experimental research confirmed findings of testing of separategroup of countries: mainly we concluded that the concept of a sustainable growth is in its rudimentary stage withgiven level of strategic application of developed economic knowledge and statistical methods towards practicaluse for the benefit of society.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".