Experience of Developed Countries on Labor Market Development: Analysis of the Current State and Prospects of Development in Ukraine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article examines the experience of developed countries on the functioning and regulation of the labor market in order to determine the prospects for development in Ukraine. The key indicators of the labor market of Ukraine, USA, EU, China and Canada are analyzed, which include: unemployment rate, unclaimed professions, average salary, employment requirements for foreigners, social package. The reasons for the instability of the labor market in modern conditions are considered, which include: migration, declining birth rates, the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused a global economic downturn, after which even economically developed countries recover within a year. Another problem of the labor market, which plays a key role in the instability of the labor market of each country – unemployment, which currently has a negative trend due to the pandemic COVID-19. A comparative analysis of the main features of the labor market in developed countries defined priority directions of our country’s development. The identified main driving force in the labor market is labor productivity. The analysis of influence of factors of development of productivity of a labor force of Ukraine is carried out. Taking into consideration the experience of developed countries, priority tasks and directions of regulation of the labor market of our country are defined, which will provide stability of economy, low level of unemployment and competitiveness of the State. Prospects for further research are the deepening of identified issues related to the labor market of our country and further development of this market, as well as the analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the labor market solely on the part of qualification and professional trends.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".