Analiza kretanja bruto domaćeg proizvoda Hrvatske u periodu 2006. - 2015.g.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tema ovog diplomskog rada je analiza bruto domaćeg proizvoda u Hrvatskoj kroz period od\n deset godina gdje se dio rada odnosi na definiranje i pobliže objašnjavanje bruto domaćeg\n proizvoda, njegove važnosti te metode mjerenja. Glavna zadaća ovog rada je analiza i\n usporedba bruto domaćeg proizvoda iz godine u godinu te na temelju toga prikazati opću\n sliku ekonomske snage i stanja Republike Hrvatske u zadanom periodu od 2006. do 2015.\n godine. Bruto domaći proizvod je tržišna vrijednost svih finalnih dobara i usluga\n proizvedenih u nekoj državi, u ovom slučaju Hrvatskoj, tijekom godine dana izraženih u\n novčanim jedinicama. Kroz razdoblje koje se analizira Republika Hrvatska je od blagog rasta\n na početku analiziranog razdoblja ušla u krizu i recesiju 2008. godine koja se nastavila\n narednih nekoliko godina. Kroz slabljene gospodarskih aktivnosti u vremenu krize i recesije,\n stope bruto domaćeg proizvoda bile su negativne, da bi se gospodarski oporavak ukazao\n krajem 2014. godine što u konačnici i dovodi do značajnijeg rasta stope bruto domaćeg\n proizvoda već u prvom kvartalu 2015. godine.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.005 |
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".