MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3106702311 · doi:10.5604/01.3001.0014.5011

Modelling labour demand in Poland

2020· article· en· W3106702311 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kamila Radlińska, Krzysztof Jaroś, Agnieszka Jakubowska, Anna Rosa

Bibliographic record

VenueWiadomości Statystyczne The Polish Statistician · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalaryQuarter (Canadian coin)EconomicsEconometricsHoarding (animal behavior)Value (mathematics)Labour economicsGross outputDistributed lagLagDemographic economicsProduction (economics)StatisticsMathematicsMacroeconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of the paper is to construct a long-term model of labour demand in Poland, in which the explanatory variables are the average gross salary and gross value added. Additionally, the authors attempt to detect labour hoarding. The study adopted the production approach, which used autoregressive distributed lag model with an ARDL-ECM error correction mechanism. The model parametres were estimated on the basis of quarterly data on the average number of persons employed, the average monthly gross salary and gross value added, all of which related to the period from the first quarter of 2002 to the fourth quarter of 2018. The data used in the study came from Statistics Poland publications. The proposed approach estimated the actual demand for labour. In the analysed period, a long-term relationship between the average employment, the average monthly gross salary and gross value added was observed. Employment was decreasing as the average salary was growing, and its increase was connected with the production growth. Moreover, short-term deviations of the value of the actual employment from the value of employment estimated by the model were observed on the labour market, which indicates labour hoarding could have been taking place. However, due to an insufficient number of observations, the occurrence of this phenomenon could not be fully 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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.321
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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.303 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWiadomości Statystyczne The Polish StatisticianSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207