Research on Formation of Kondratiev Сycles in Canadian Economy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work is devoted to analysis of the formation of Kondratiev cycles in 1870– 2008.The study aims to obtain data about the possible formation of long cycles on the basis of spectral analysis of deviations from the trend of the time series of real GDP per capita. The study notes that the Kondratiev cycles had gainedthe greatest power by the early twentieth century. This is most clearly seen in the 1930s. Later during the study, we found that the power of the Kondratiev cycles is waning and becomes minimal by 1960. All the decreasingsegments of Kondratiev cycles do no exhibitneither bursts of power, nor any short-term increases in capacity. This study suggests that in the Canadian economy, the change of technological orders by the end of the twentieth century was notshaped in accordance with the time frame outlined by the Kondratiev cycles. For example, cycles with a period of 33,3 years had the most power,which may indicate that by the end of the twentieth century a change in technological structure has a shorter time framefor developed countries.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".