ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK APPLICATION IN GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT FORECASTING AN INDONESIA CASE
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a benchmark for economic production conditions of a country. Estimates of economic growth in the coming year in a country has important roles, among others as a benchmark in determining business plans for business entities, and the basis for devising government fiscal policy. Artificial Neural Network (ANN) has been increasingly recognized as a good forecasting tool in various fields. Its nature that can mimic the workings of the human brain makes it flexible for non-linear and non-parametric data. GDP growth forecasting techniques using ANN has been widely used in various countries, such as the United States, Canada, Germany, Austria, Iran, China, Japan and others. In Indonesia, forecasting of GDP is only done by government institutions, namely National Planning Board, using macroeconomic model. In this study, ANN is used as a tool for forecasting GDP growth in Indonesia, using some variables, such as GDP growth in the two previous periods, population growth rate, inflation, exchange rate and political stability and security conditions in Indonesia. Results from this study indicate that ANN forecasts GDP relatively better than the one issued by the government. Further study would be to use ANN to predict other economic indicators.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it