Bibliographic record
Abstract
Real GDP advanced at an annualized rate of 2.8 percent in the second quarter, according to the final release from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. This is a downward revision of 0.5 percentage point from the preliminary estimate, but it is still up 0.9 percentage point from the advance estimate. The downward adjustment (from preliminary to final) was largely due to a revision to real consumption growth, from an increase of 1.7 percent to 1.2 percent. Exports were also revised down from an increase of 13.2 percent to 12.3 percent, while the decrease in imports was revised up from −7.5 percent to −7.3 percent. Inventories decreased by $50.6 billion, according to the final estimate, down from a subtraction of $39.2 billion in the previous estimate. On a positive note, the contraction in residential investment, which has been quite a large drag on growth lately, was revised up 2.5 percentage points, to a decrease of −13.3 percent. While still negative, this is a considerable improvement over the −25.0 percent in the first 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 | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.027 |
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".