Détermination du PIB réel trimestriel du Québec et analyse du cycle économique, 1948-1980
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to consolidate the economic history of Quebec over the period from 1948 to 1980. Unlike previous economic studies relating to this period, we identify the chronology of the economic cycle of Quebec by estimating the real quarterly GDP by using the method of Ginsburgh (1973) as modified by De Carufel and Lizotte (1982). Our analysis of the duration and intensity of recessions confirms the presence of regional cycles in Canada. Il shows also that the business cycle of Quebec is more strongly correlated with the US cycle than with the cycle in the rest of Canada. Cette étude vise à affermir notre compréhension de l’histoire économique du Québec sur la période allant de 1948 à 1980. À la différence des études économiques antérieures portant sur cette période, nous identifions la chronologie du cycle économique du Québec en estimant le PIB réel trimestriel à l’aide de la méthode de Ginsburgh (1973) telle que modifiée par De Carufel et Lizotte (1982). Notre analyse de la durée et de l’intensité des récessions confirme la présence de cycles régionaux au Canada. Elle montre aussi que le cycle du Québec est plus fortement corrélé avec le cycle américain qu’avec le cycle du reste du Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".