MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029534734 · doi:10.5539/cis.v5n5p55

Growth of ICT Capital and Deceleration of Labour Productivity in the EU Countries: The Missing Links

2012· article· en· W2029534734 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Pradip Kumar Biswas, Alberto Moreira Baptista

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer and Information Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityInformation and Communications TechnologyWorkforceICTSCapital (architecture)Service (business)Eu countriesBusinessLabour economicsEconomicsEuropean unionComputer scienceEconomic growthEconomyInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Labour productivity in most of the EU countries grew much slower than in US over the last one and a half decades and the difference is attributed to the difference in the use of ICT. Analysing EU KLEMS database (capital (K), labour (L), energy (E), material (M) and service inputs (S)) and Eurostat database it is noted that the micro and small enterprises, numerically predominant in the EU countries, use much less amount of ICT. With very low proportion of enterprises with ICT installation, with less sophisticated technology and probably with the lowest amount of ICT capital, these enterprises employ relatively larger proportion of workers who use ICTs. The larger enterprises on the other hand with more sophisticated and larger quantity ICT capital employ fewer workers who handle this technology. An implication of this is the fast growth of productivity of selected highly ICT skilled workers of the larger enterprises leaving rest of the workforce to benefit least from the technology. It is obvious under this situation that the overall productivity growth of the workers would be stunted.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer and Information ScienceSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207