MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890895219 · doi:10.3386/w10106

Firm Location and the Creation and Utilization of Human Capital

2003· preprint· en· W2890895219 on OpenAlexaff
Andrés Almazán, Adolfo de Motta, Sheridan Titman

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2003
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverconfidence effectFlexibility (engineering)ProductivityHuman capitalIndustrial organizationInvestment (military)Affect (linguistics)BusinessMicroeconomicsScale (ratio)Capital (architecture)EconomicsMarket economyMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a theory of location choice that draws on insights from the incomplete contracts and investment flexibility (real option) literatures.We provide conditions under which human capital is more efficiently created and better utilized within industrial clusters that contain similar firms.Our analysis indicates that location choices are influenced by the extent to which training costs are borne by firms versus employees as well as by the uncertainty about future productivity shocks and the ability of firms to modify the scale of their operations.Extensions of our model consider, among other things, endogenous technological choices by firms in clusters and how behavioral biases (i.e., managerial overconfidence about their firms' prospects) can affect firms' location choices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.286
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.141 · 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

Citations13
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207