The Effect of Technology Choice on Automobile Assembly Plant Productivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Productivity growth is usually represented by a continuous shift of the production or cost function. In the automobile industry, there is evidence of a more discrete change in the technology. I estimate a structural model of production and technology choice, using a panel of US automobile assembly plants from 1963 to 1996. New decomposition results suggest that plant-level changes, as opposed to compositional effects, are the most important determinant of aggregate productivity growth. I UNDERSTANDING PRODUCTIVITY IS IMPORTANT In recent decades, the US automobile industry has seen several importantpolicy interventions. Voluntary export restraints were in effect for most of the 1980s, restricting Japanese imports; many states awarded significant subsidies to attract greenfield investments of both domestic and foreign firms; and a joint venture between General Motors and Toyota, with the exchange of technologies as an explicit goal, was given antitrust exemption in 1984. 65 * jovb@chass.utoronto.ca. I wish to thank Frank Wolak for many helpful discussions and suggestions. I benefited from comments from Lanier Benkard, Peter Reiss, and seminar participants at Stanford University. I am also grateful to Mike Clune at the CCRDC for help with
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".