Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Using the Ramsey‐Cass‐Koopmans model with heterogeneous agents, this note presents the explicit relationship between the individual's asset holding and the aggregate capital stock. With the aid of this relationship, is examined the dynamics of income distribution as the economy expands. Finally, some examples are presented, contrary to the conjecture made in Li, Xie, and Zou (2000) , showing that the income can still improve over time, even when the aggregate production function is convex. JEL classification: D3, O1, O4 Commentaires sur « Dynamique de la distribution du revenu ». A l’aide d’un modèle de type Ramsey‐Cass‐Koopmans avec des agents hétérogènes, cette note présente la relation explicite entre le stock d’actif détenu par l’individu et le stock de capital agrégé. A l’aide de cette relation, on examine la dynamique de la distribution du revenu à proportion que l’économie croît. Enfin certains exemples sont présentés qui contredisent la conjecture proposée par Li, Xie et Zou (2000) à savoir que le revenu peut s’accroître dans le temps même quand la fonction de production agrégée est convexe.
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 | 0.006 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.009 |
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".