MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163014395 · doi:10.1080/13504850050059078

The behaviour of productivity growth rates and composition bias in the labour input

2000· article· en· W2163014395 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James MacGee, Weiqiu Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Economics Letters · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolow residualEconomicsEndogeneityBusiness cycleImperfect competitionProductivityResidualEconometricsCapital (architecture)Total factor productivityGrowth accountingCompetition (biology)Returns to scaleAggregate (composite)MacroeconomicsLabour economicsMonetary economicsProduction (economics)MicroeconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The conventionally calculated Solow residual has been used as a measure of exogenous productivity shocks that contribute to the business cycle. However, recently this residual has been shown to be endogenous and has led to the conclusion that the aggregate economy is characterized by increasing returns to scale and imperfect competition. Another hypothesis is that the Solow residual may fail to be exogenous due to measurement errors in labour and capital. Using an efficiency hours series corrected for the composition bias in the labour force and a capital series adjusted for capacity utilization for Canada, it was found that adjusting the Solow residual for cyclical variations in labour and capital inputs over the business cycle re-establishes exogeneity of productivity shocks.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations2
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Economics LettersSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207