Bibliographic record
Abstract
Third-quarter GDP growth was revised down again in the third estimate. The annualized growth rate has dropped in successive estimates from 3.5 percent to 2.8 percent to 2.2 percent, the latest. This most recent revision was greater than expected (the consensus expectation was for 2.7 percent growth). The four-quarter percent change also fell 0.1 percentage point to −2.6 percent. The downward revision was largely driven by an additional 1.8 percentage point (pp) decrease in business fixed investment and smaller reductions in personal consumption and private inventories. Other declines occurred in government spending and residential investment. Government spending dropped some of the gain ascribed to it in the second estimate, falling from a 3.1 percent increase to a 2.7 percent increase in the third estimate. Residential investment continued its downward path of revision since the advanced estimate, dropping another 0.6 pp to end at 18.9 percent growth. These losses were offset only by a positive revision to exports, which added 0.8 pp to its annualized growth from last quarter.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.013 |
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".