Bibliographic record
Abstract
This small note with a swollen Appendix illustrates how foreign ownership data and aggregate production function assumptions can be used to deduce what Canadian domestic output and national income might be if there were less foreign capital. The appendix spells out the calculation procedure, which depends heavily on the assumed ease with which labour can be substituted for capital in the production process. Consider first two extreme possibilities. On the one extreme, if there were no substitution possible between capital and labour, then any reduction in the stock of capital would lead to proportionate drops in output and employment. In this sort of world, anything that jeopardizes the inflow of capital required to finance the technically-necessary capital-labour ratio has high costs in terms of unemployment and foregone income. At the other extreme, if there is perfect substitution between capital and labour, and if foreign capital is paid the value of its marginal product, then changing the amount of foreign capital would have no effect on national income. Domestic output would drop if the foreign capital were not present, but the amount of the drop would be just equal to the amount of output formerly used to pay the return on the foreign capital. Somewhere between these two extremes lies the constant-returns CobbDouglas production function assumed in the present calculations. Under these assumptions, we need both capital and labour to get any output, but any combination of capital and labour can be usefully employed in cooperation. However, as labour is substituted for capital, the amount of extra labour required to replace one unit of capital increases as the amount of capital decreases. Under these conditions, therefore, it comes 1 The idea of using a Cobb-Douglas production function to estimate the consequences of less foreign investment is based on earlier work by Phil Neher. 2 The foreign ownership data and the assumed production function for business output have been developed as parts of the aggregate quarterly model RDX2. The theory, equations, and variables of the model are described in J. F. Helliwell, H. T. Shapiro, G. R. Sparks, I. A. Stewart, F. W. Gorbet, and D. R. Stephenson: The Structure of RDX2. Ottawa, Bank of Canada, 1971. (Bank of Canada Staff Research Studies, No. 7.)
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 0.003 |
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".