Prédiction et prévision en histoire économique : les succès suisses et scandinaves étaient-ils prévisibles?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’historien de l’économie dispose de multiples outils pour analyser les réussites économiques. Il parvient le plus souvent à les rendre logiques et évidentes, mais en ayant la chance de travailler sur des évènements passés qui ne peuvent pas contredire son raisonnement. Toutefois, l’analyse des plus beaux succès – suisses et scandinaves – nuance les modèles les plus couramment admis : comme l’exploitation de ressources naturelles abondantes, la révolution industrielle libérale à l’anglaise ou le triomphe de la grande usine. En effet, les développements suisse, suédois et norvégien offrent de belles pistes de réflexion car ils reposent davantage sur les PME, sur des politiques volontaristes et sur une maîtrise ancienne des statistiques.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".