Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite developing countries accounting for an increasing share of world income and exports, no significant shift in the ranks of the 25 largest economies by GDP has occurred between 1965 and 2007. And only China, and perhaps India but none of the other large developing economies, would account for a significantly higher share of world income by 2025 or 2050. Furthermore, in terms of per capita income, India would continue to remain relatively poor. We then find that there was no significant shift in economic power between 1990 and 2005 on the basis of an index formed from about 20 indicators of economic power. Next we measured how far countries were from the US on the basis of these indicators. Practically all countries, particularly the European ones, had substantially reduced the lead of the US. But China and India starting far away had moved only slightly closer to the US. The ability to generate new technology is a major factor in the power rankings. China had reduced the lead of the US in technology generating factors whereas India had almost stagnated. Consequently, China’s prospects of increasing its power were better than India’s.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it