MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2257646945

An Update on Depreciation Rates for the Canadian Productivity Accounts

2015· preprint· en· W2257646945 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John R. Baldwin, Huju Liu, Marc Tanguay

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDepreciation (economics)EconomicsConsumption of fixed capitalDispose patternValuation (finance)ProductivityEconometricsEarnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortizationBook valueMonetary economicsMicroeconomicsEarningsCapital formationMacroeconomicsProfit (economics)FinanceComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper generates updated estimates of depreciation rates to be used in the Canadian Productivity Accounts for the calculation of capital stock and the user cost of capital. Estimates are derived of depreciation profiles for a diverse set of assets, based on patterns of resale prices and retirement ages. A maximum likelihood technique is used to jointly estimate changes in the valuation of assets over the course of their service life, as well as the nature of the discard process used to dispose of assets to generate depreciation rates. This method is more efficient than others in producing estimates with less bias and higher efficiency. The earlier estimates that were derived for the period from 1985 to 2001 are compared with those for the latest period, from 2002 to 2010.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0190.021
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.006

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
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

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207