MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004774179 · doi:10.5539/res.v6n1p10

Determinants of the Levels of Development Based on the Human Development Index: A Comparison of Regression Models for Limited Dependent Variables

2014· article· en· W2004774179 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miraç Eren, Ali Kemal Çeli̇k, Arif Kubat

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTobit modelEconometricsHuman Development IndexPer capitaVariablesIndex (typography)ProbitRegression analysisLogistic regressionLogitEconomicsProbit modelOrdered probitStatisticsHuman development (humanity)Life expectancyRegressionDemographic economicsMathematicsDemographyEconomic growthComputer scienceSociologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper aims to examine the factors affecting the level of development of countries using various regression models for limited dependent variables including binary logit, probit and Tobit analyses. In this manner, the paper may suggest a road map for high developed countries to achieve very high developed levels. For this purpose, Human Development Indices of 84 countries were involved in the analysis with respect to nine independent variables. The results of the all regression models indicates that determinants including life expectancy at birth, expected years of schooling, labour force participation rate (female-male ratio), and GDP per capita have statistically significant effects on the level of development.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.135 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations36
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of European StudiesSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207