MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W194913811 · doi:10.7202/701275ar

Les avatars des économies de marché

2005· article· en· W194913811 on OpenAlexaffvenue
André Joyal

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPessimismFordismProductivityProfitability indexEconomicsCapital (architecture)Intervention (counseling)EconomyRelevance (law)State (computer science)Market economyEconomic systemPolitical scienceMacroeconomicsPsychologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The difficulties experienced by the Western economies since the middle seventie have given rise to considerable debate among economists. Some, referring to structural changes in the way the economy functions, have no hesitation in speaking of an economic crisis, while others, less pessimistic, consider that the present economic problems are due to the concordance of particular circumstances. The latter, evidently, belong to the dominant current of thought. Within this group we find some old ideas being put forward once more, challenging the various means of State intervention to regulate the economy. The relevance of treating the present situation as one of economic crisis is dealt with here in the light of four inter-related factors : the fall in labor productivity, the slowdown of the impact of technology, fordism, and the profitability of capital. A reconsideration of traditional economic policies brings out the need to accept the requirements of slower economic growth. Many persons have already adopted their consumer behavior to this new situation.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.005

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207