MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906779090

Physiological Aging around the World and Economic Growth

2018· preprint· en· W2906779090 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carl‐Johan Dalgaard, Casper Worm Hansen, Holger Strulik

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographicsProductivityPopulation ageingQuarter (Canadian coin)Demographic economicsEconomicsLongevityDevelopment economicsPopulationEconomic geographyGerontologyGeographyDemographyEconomic growthMedicineSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the composition of the world population gradually shifts towards older age groups, it becomes increasingly important to understand the ináuence of aging on macroeconomic outcomes of interest. Until now, however, it has been impossible to separate out the role played by demographics from the pure role of aging at the country level. Drawing on research in the Öelds of biology and medicine, the present study provides data on physiological aging. Our data shows that, over the last quarter of a century, the average person in the global labor force has not grown older in physiological terms. In an application of our panel dataset, we Önd evidence that accelerated physiological aging causally reduces labor productivity. Taken together, our analysis suggests that if productivity growth has deaccelerated in recent decades, physiological aging is unlikely to be a contributing force.Keywords: Physiological Aging; Economic Growth JEL Classification: O5; I15

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)0.005
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.003

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.362 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207