MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125359529

Finance and Growth: A Critical Survey

2006· preprint· en· W3125359529 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2006
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEconomic Growth and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDurham UniversityUniversity of GlasgowUniversity of BirminghamHeriot-Watt UniversityUniversity of WarwickUniversity of CambridgeUniversity of St AndrewsLondon Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of ExeterUniversity of EssexVanderbilt UniversityYork UniversityGeorge Washington University
KeywordsNexus (standard)MainstreamInterpretation (philosophy)Core (optical fiber)Positive economicsEconomicsEmpirical researchEconometricsEpistemologyPolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a survey of the finance-growth nexus that raises a number of qualifications to the standard interpretation. We investigate doubts regarding empirical consensus and we consider the prevalence of cross-section econometrics as dominant in shaping the present theoretical consensus. The core implications of many finance and growth theories are shown to be disconnected not only from their modern empirical counterparts, but also from the historical literature. Copyright © 2006 The Economic Society of Australia.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.266 · 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