MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884732929 · doi:10.1515/jbnst-2018-0015

Studying Firm Growth Distributions with a Large Administrative Employment Database

2018· article· en· W2884732929 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jay Dixon, Robert J. Petrunia, Anne-Marie Rollin

Bibliographic record

VenueJahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistribution (mathematics)Annual growth %EconomicsGrowth rateDemographic economicsEconometricsLabour economicsDatabaseAgricultural economicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper uses business tax administrative data to describe the annual firm growth rate distribution in Canada over the 2000–2009 period. This administrative tax database provides a unique lense to study firm growth as it allows us to look at the universe of Canadian employer firms and investigate the firm growth distribution across different dimensions. A non-normal, fat-tailed shape for the firm growth distributions holds across years, industries, regions, as well as firm size and age classes. The results show that the distributions of employment growth rates in Canada have more density in both the center and tails than a normal distribution. The evidence paints a picture of firm growth dynamics whereby most firms change very little each year, while a nontrivial amount also markedly grow or decline. A final finding is that young firms, aged four or less, represent a special case with an upwardly skewed distribution and a median growth rate greater than zero.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und StatistikSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207