Firm dynamics and productivity growth: a comparison of the retail trade and manufacturing sectors
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
This article examines how the reallocation of market shares differs in the retail trade and manufacturing sectors and what it reveals about the nature of competition in the two sectors. It compares and contrasts the amount and type of firm dynamics and examines its contribution to aggregate productivity growth in those two sectors. The potential competitive pressures acting on these two very different industries were very similar in that about the same proportion of firms entered and exited both industries. The survival processes associated with exit were similar. There were similar differences in productivity between entrants and the exits that they drove out. While the potential for turnover was the same, its realization was not. Retail entrants bought a different option when they experimented with entry that suggests different entry costs. They started at a larger relative size upon entry. The differences that occurred in relative entry size gave retail entrants a greater proportional share of output and inputs and led the turnover process to make a greater contribution to aggregate productivity growth.
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 | 0.000 | 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