MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2738286870

Makroekonomiczne determinanty bezrobocia na przykladzie Polski i Stanow Zjednoczonych w latach 2000–2016 [Macroeconomic determinants of unemployment on the example of Poland and United States in years 2000–2016]

2016· article· pl· W2738286870 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paulina Bernacka

Bibliographic record

VenueCatallaxy · 2016
Typearticle
Languagepl
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLabour Market and Migration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsUnemploymentFull employmentUnemployment rateMisery indexInflation (cosmology)Quarter (Canadian coin)Real gross domestic productInflation rateInterest rateLabour economicsMonetary economicsMacroeconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivation: The motivation for choosing a subject was high importance of long-term unemployment for economic growth and methods of unemployed profiling to prevent that phenomenon. Aim: The aim of the article was the selection of macroeconomic determinants of long-term unemployment in Poland and the United States. The analysis was also focused on discussing the possibility of combating long-term unemployment through the unemployed profiling and the current results of this method in Poland. Results: The following macroeconomic variables had a statistically significant impact on the unemployment rate: the unemployment rate in the previous quarter, real GDP growth rate, inflation rate, growth rate for export share in GDP and investments. In most cases, this influence was in line with economic theory. In Poland, the unemployment rate is most responsive to changes in GDP in the opposite direction. It can be expected that stimulating economic growth or taking actions supporting it in the long run, should translate into a decrease in the unemployment rate in Poland. In the United States, growth rate for export share in GDP and investments had a significant impact on unemployment rate.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCatallaxySame topicLabour Market and MigrationFrench-language works237,207