MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586309335 · doi:10.31648/oej.2924

Controversies on the Economic Effects of Fixed - Term Employment - Evidence from the OECD Countries

2016· article· en· W2586309335 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eugeniusz Kwiatkowski

Bibliographic record

VenueOlsztyn Economic Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsLabour economicsTerm (time)Quarter (Canadian coin)Fixed effects modelFlexibility (engineering)Fixed costMarket segmentationLabour market flexibilityDemographic economicsPanel dataMacroeconomicsEconometricsUnemploymentMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on fixed-term employment in the OECD countries, its trends and conditions, as well as controversies regarding its significance for flexibility of employment and labour market segmentation. Statistical data show that fixed-term employment significantly increased its share in total employment in many OECD countries in the last quarter century. The reasons of this trend can be sought in the lower labour cost of this type of employment, and the ease with which this group of employees can be dismissed, which was in part a result of the relaxed legal protection of fixed-term employment in the nineties. Analyses indicate that the increase in the share of fixed-term employment affect employment elasticity nonlinearly according to the shape of the letter U. The analyses support the hypothesis about the segmentation of the labour market as a result of the development of fixed-term employment.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOlsztyn Economic JournalSame topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequalityFrench-language works237,207