MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023130535 · doi:10.3386/w20615

Tax Credits and Small Firm R&D Spending

2014· preprint· en· W3023130535 on OpenAlexafffund
Ajay Agrawal, Carlos Rosell, Timothy Simcoe

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInnovation Policy and R&D
Canadian institutionsQuest University CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersRotman School of Management, University of TorontoSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsTax creditBusinessMonetary economicsEconomicsPublic economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

R&D conducted by small private firms. Difference in difference estimates show a seventeen percent increase in total R&D among eligible firms. The impact was larger for firms that took the tax credits as refunds because they had no current tax liability. Contract R&D expenditures were more elastic than the R&D wage bill. The response was also greater for firms that invested in R&D capital before the policy change.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.729
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.525
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.047 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicInnovation Policy and R&DFrench-language works237,207