MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118518849 · doi:10.1111/0008-4085.00097

Distributional dynamics following a technological revolution

2001· article· fr· W2118518849 on OpenAlexaffvenue
David Andolfatto, Eric Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2001
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceEarningsEconomicsWelfare economicsPhilosophyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we explore the link between technological change and the dynamics of employment, production, and the distribution of earnings. Technological change not only advances society's collective capability but also changes the relative productivities of its members. The latter effect establishes the likely winners and losers from advances in productive capabilities, provides a mechanism that can generate cyclical fluctuations in output as well as employment, and determines the evolution of the earnings distribution. Dynamique de la répartition à la suite d'une révolution technologique. Ce mémoire examine le lien entre le changement technologique et la dynamique de l'emploi, de la production et de la répartition des revenus. Le changement technologique n'augmente pas seulement la capacité collective d'une société mais modifie aussi les productivités relatives de ses membres. Ce dernier effet crée des gagnants et des perdants, déclenche un mécanisme qui peut générer des fluctuations cycliques tant dans le niveau de production que dans celui de l'emploi, et détermine l'évolution de la répartition des revenus.

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)0.009
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.080 · 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

Citations8
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économiqueSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207