Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth: The Growth Spiral: Money, Energy, and Imagination in the Dynamics of the Market Process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jesse Perla of University of British Columbia reviews, “The Growth Spiral: Money, Energy, and Imagination in the Dynamics of the Market Process” by Hans Christoph Binswanger. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Revised translation of Die Wachstumsspirale (2006). Presents a new theoretical approach to understanding the modern economy, focusing on its dynamic aspects. Discusses the difference between market and barter—money and the making of markets; capital and the firm—the firm as the engine of the market process; money and money creation in a two-stage banking system; the development of the theories of production—valid insights and shortcomings; production involving nature and imagination; income distribution in the process of growth; the move from the theory of growth to the theory of the growing economy; the economic process as a growth spiral; the increase of the present value of profits as the growth impetus; the avoidance of losses as the growth imperative; and growth opportunities and growth obstacles—the role of the state. Binswanger is with the Institute for Economy and the Environment at the University of St. Gallen.”
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".