MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296061783 · doi:10.55365/1923.x2022.20.18

Using Taylor’s Law to Estimate Variance in Annual Unemployment by State

2022· article· en· W4296061783 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David A. Swanson, Jeff Tayman

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Economics and Finance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSpatial and Panel Data Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnemploymentVariance (accounting)State (computer science)Sample varianceSample (material)InequalityEconometricsEconomicsStatisticsMathematicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taylor's law (TL) is a widely observed empirical pattern that relates variance to the the mean of a set of non-negative measurements via an approximate power function: varianceg a (meang) b , where g indexes the group of measurements. While widely observed, we have not found an application of TL to annualized state unemployment data. Thus, in this paper, we construct a model using TL to estimate of the variance in the 2018 annualized number of employed by state using the mean number. Our "in-sample" set consists of 38 states with 25 or more counties.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Economics and FinanceSame topicSpatial and Panel Data AnalysisFrench-language works237,207