MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945500278 · doi:10.5604/01.3001.0014.0975

Verification of the typical ratio between both the number of households and business entities (quantum satis) for selected countries

2017· article· en· W2945500278 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Józef Hozer, Szymon Machała

Bibliographic record

VenueWiadomości Statystyczne The Polish Statistician · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Fiscal Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaOutsourcingPopulationDeveloping countryDeveloped countryEconomicsEconomyBusinessEconomic growthDemographyPolitical scienceSociologyMarketingLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a G = αX ratio between the number of households (G) and the number of business entities (X), where α equals 5.00 for well-developed countries. The aim of the study was to verify this proportion (called ”quantum satis”) for countries with significant number of population in the period of 2010—2016. It involved countries such as Brazil, Canada, China, India, Poland, Russia and the USA on the basis of data obtained from the statistical offices websites and the OECD. The formulas of the regression function were used in the research. In 2016 such proportion was reached by Russia and China. For the economies of highly developed countries the value of α may be less than 5,00, which is influenced by processes such as outsourcing, entrepreneurship and economic liberalism (such countries include i.a. the USA and Canada).

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)0.009
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiadomości Statystyczne The Polish StatisticianSame topicEconomic and Fiscal StudiesFrench-language works237,207