Institutional Integration in the Sphere of Business Infrastructure in the European Union in the Years 2000-2008
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: The last decade has been a period of accelerated integration in Europe. A manifestation of this was the biggest ever enlargement of the EU in 2004. Therefore the aim of this study is an evaluation of integration process in EU in the sphere of economic institutional order. The analysis concentrates on the institutional factors that affects the ability of country to utilize potential of competitive global economy. In this study some taxonomic tools were used - a hierarchical classification procedure (Ward's method with Euclidean and Manhattan distance). The study was based on annual data from the period 2000-2008. It allowed to capture a period of four years before and after the biggest enlargement of the EU. The research problem of this study amounted to the question: whether in the analyzed period can one speak about the process of growing similarities in the sphere of business institutional order for “old” and “new” EU countries? The study confirms existence of integration processes in relation to institutional order. However, it also proves the existence of group of countries that can be described by homogenous institutional factors especially effective in supporting utilization of the potential of competitive global economy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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".