MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201171204 · doi:10.33423/jabe.v23i1.4053

Trends in the “Europe 2020” Strategy An Overview

2021· article· en· W3201171204 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Papageorgiou Christos, Anastasiou Athanasios, Liargovas Panagiotis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Business and Economics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQuality of Life Measurement
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnergy expenditureGreenhouse gasRenewable energyConsumption (sociology)Member statesDemographic economicsEconomicsAgricultural economicsDevelopment economicsMedicineEuropean unionEngineeringInternational economicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Eight indicators corresponding to the targets of “Europe 2020” Strategy were used to estimate the deviation of EU Member-States from their targets. The study showed that: i) the distance to the employment target of 75 % of people aged 20-64 years has narrowed, ii) the expenditure for R&D as a percentage of GDP are still below the target of 3%, iii) the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in ESD sectors by 20 % compared to 1990 levels are still below the target, iv) the increase of the share of renewable energy in final consumption to 20 % remains just below the target, v) the move towards a 20% increase in energy efficiency shows a good prospect, vi) the reduction of school drop-out rates to less than 10 % is steadily approaching its target, vii) the share of population aged 30-34 having completed tertiary education to at least 40 % is steadily approaching its target, viii) the lifting at least 20 million people out of risk of poverty was not achieved.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Business and EconomicsSame topicQuality of Life MeasurementFrench-language works237,207