MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994221510 · doi:10.3897/popecon.2.e36041

CYCLIC FLUCTUATIONS OF THE RUSSIAN AND FOREIGN LABOUR MARKET INDICATORS: IN SEARCH FOR NON-STANDARD REACTIONS

2018· article· en· W2994221510 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aleksey Semenkov

Bibliographic record

VenuePopulation and Economics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Development and Digital Transformation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)UnemploymentWorkforceEconomicsLabour economicsWork (physics)MacroeconomicsGeographyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article presents the results of a comparative analysis of the dynamics of trend-cycles of macroeconomic indicators of the Russian and foreign labor markets for the period from the I quarter 2003 to the IV quarter 2015. The work analyzes fluctuations in the trend-cycles of the following indicators: the level of participation in the workforce (level of EAP), the level of employment and unemployment measured by the ILO methodology. As foreign labor markets, 25 OECD countries are taken. Correlation coefficients between all the labor markets examined for these indicators were estimated. In addition, fluctuations in trend-cycles of indicators are ranked according to the degree of sensitivity to the crisis phenomena of 2008. It is established that the Russian labor market was not characterized by non-standard reactions in comparison with foreign labor markets, including in response to the crisis events of 2008. In this regard, the hypothesis of a “special model” of the Russian labor market has not been confirmed.

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)0.003
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePopulation and EconomicsSame topicEconomic Development and Digital TransformationFrench-language works237,207