MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2163854387

Comment on Estimating Capital Input for Measuring Canadian Multifactor Productivity Growth

2012· preprint· en· W2163854387 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erwin Diewert

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2012
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityRate of returnEconometricsCapital (architecture)EconomicsReturn on capital employedCapital formationMacroeconomicsFinanceHuman capitalGeographyFinancial capitalEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper lays out the algebra behind the Diewert-Yu capital services methodology and the corresponding methodology used by the Statistics Canada Canadian Productivity Program. The large differences in the estimates can mainly be explained by different treatments of the expected capital gains term in user costs and the use of sectoral balancing rates of return versus economy wide balancing rates of return.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.077
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.077
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0060.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth→French-language works237,207→