MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017202636 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v5n7p145

Primal and Dual Economic Measures of Capacity Utilization in Tunisia

2013· article· en· W2017202636 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kamel Helali, Mohamed Siala, Maha Kalai

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsReturns to scaleProduction theoryDual (grammatical number)Production (economics)EconometricsShort runProductivityCapacity utilizationCapital (architecture)Stock (firearms)Inflation (cosmology)Duality (order theory)TangentScale (ratio)MicroeconomicsMathematicsMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primal and dual measures of capacity utilization under certain conditions, such as the nature of the economy of scale, have been widely used to analyze the current state of the economy in explaining the labor productivity and the inflation rate. However, the characteristics of certain measures are the ad hoc, since they are not based on explicit theoretical foundations. Nevertheless, many approaches have used the economic theory of cost and production by defining production capacity as the level of the output where the short and long run average total cost curves are tangent. Under the condition of constant returns to scale in the long run, productive capacity corresponds to the output that minimizes the short-run average total cost curve. To explain the shift of the aggregate production to industrial production, a dynamic duality theory has prompted researchers to revise the concept of the short-run production capacity, conditioned by a quasi-fixed stock of capital.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicEconomic Theory and PolicyFrench-language works237,207