MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954393893 · doi:10.56497/etj1863103

EU FUNDS AND ECONOMIC GROWTH IN BULGARIA

2018· article· en· W2954393893 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
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

VenueEconomic Thought journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsCohesion (chemistry)EconomicsEconometricsMacroeconomicsInterpretation (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study the financial resources from the Structural and Cohesion Funds which Bulgaria has received are analyzed, presented as expenditures from the EU budget and their link to economic growth is examined. Quarterly statistical data covering the period 2008-2014 is used, along with 28 observations. A standard linear regression is applied for the calculation of the coefficients and the interpretation of the results in the form of the least squares method. The results of the empirical analysis show that there is a proportional statistically significant link between the financial resources from the EU budget and the economic growth of Bulgaria. It is assumed that the expenditure incurred during the analyzed period under the Structural and Cohesion Funds has led to a 1% increase in the economic growth of the country.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.748
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.282 · 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