MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004003797 · doi:10.3390/jrfm13020021

How to Explain When the ES Is Lower Than One? A Bayesian Nonlinear Mixed-Effects Approach

2020· article· en· W3004003797 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nguyễn Ngọc Thạch

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic theories and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVietnameseConstant elasticity of substitutionElasticity of substitutionEconometricsUnitary stateEconomicsBayesian probabilityProduction (economics)Substitution (logic)Function (biology)Production functionNonlinear systemRandom effects modelCobb–Douglas production functionMicroeconomicsMathematicsComputer scienceStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most studies in Vietnam use the Cobb-Douglas production function and its modifications for economic analysis. Extremely rigid presumptions are a main weak point of this functional form, particularly if the elasticity of factor substitution (ES) is equal to one, which hides the role of the ES for economic growth. The CES (constant elasticity of substitution) production function with more flexible presumptions, concretely its ES, is not unitary, and has been used more and more widely in economic investigations. So, this study is conducted to estimate the average ES through the specification of an aggregate CES function for the Vietnamese nonfinancial enterprises. By performing Bayesian nonlinear mixed-effects regression via Random-walk Metropolis Hastings (MH) algorithm, based on the data set of the listed nonfinancial enterprises of Vietnam, the author found that the CES function estimated for the researched enterprises has an ES lower than one, i.e., capital and labor are complimentary. This finding shows that Vietnamese nonfinancial enterprises can confront a downward trend of output growth.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations44
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicEconomic theories and modelsFrench-language works237,207