MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3126776341 · doi:10.2991/assehr.k.210121.006

What is the Relationship Among Wages, Supplementary Labor Income, Unemployment and Productivity?

2021· article· en· W3126776341 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Huixuan Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 6th Annual International Conference on Social Science and Contemporary Humanity Development (SSCHD 2020) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityUnemploymentLabour economicsEconomicsDemographic economicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigated the relationship between the labor wage (LC), supplementary labor income (SLI), unemployment rate (UN), and labor productivity (LP) of the manufacturing industry in Canada, using time-series econometric techniques.This study was based on the Vector Autoregression Model (VAR) and applied Granger causality Wald tests.Then tested the validity and stability of the model.The results show that all variables did not significantly affect productivity except the first order of itself and labor wages, which indicated that increasing wages improve the passions for work.Moreover, the positive relation between LW and UN presented that the ascending cost of labors decreased the demand of workers, so the unemployment rate raised.However, SIL, which is the difference between LW and labor compensation, ignoring the self-employed income, followed the converse results of LW.The first-order lag of productivity drove a decrease in the unemployment rate.Therefore, policymakers in the manufacturing industry could reconsider the relationships described in this study to adjust productivity and unemployment effectively.

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)0.005
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 score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the 6th Annual International Conference on Social Science and Contemporary Humanity Development (SSCHD 2020)→Same topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality→French-language works237,207→