MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121498426

Death in the Industrial World: Plant Closures and Capital Retirement

2005· preprint· en· W3121498426 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John R. Baldwin

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2005
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFirm Innovation and Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapital (architecture)Work (physics)BusinessProduction (economics)EconomicsLabour economicsAgricultural economicsEngineeringGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant deaths arise from failure when firms exit an industry. Plant deaths are also associated with renewal when incumbent firms close down plants and modernize their production facilities and start-up new plants. The rate of plant deaths affects the amount of change that occurs in labour and capital markets. Plant deaths result in job losses and incur significant human costs as employees are forced to seek other work. The death process also gives rise to capital losses - to the loss of earlier investments that the industrial system had made in productive capacity. This paper makes use of the plant-death date to provide new information on the likely length of life of capital invested in plants. This paper measures the death rate over a forty year period for new plants in the Canadian manufacturing sector. It develops a profile of the death rate for entrants as they age. On average, 14% of new plants die in their first year. Over half of new plants die by the age of six. By the age of 15, less than 20% are still alive. As a result, manufacturing plants have relatively short lives. The average new plant lives only nine years (17 years if the average is employment-weighted). These rates vary by industry. The longest length of life (13 years) can be found in two industries -primary metals and paper and allied products. The shortest average length of life (less than 8 years) occurs in wood industries.

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)0.006
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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicFirm Innovation and GrowthFrench-language works237,207