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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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