Global impact on human obesity – A robust non-linear panel data analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Recent studies in economics showed that humans are bounded rational. This being consumers, they are not perfect judges of what matters for the standard of living. While with a marked increase in economic and social wellbeing, there is a consistent rise in obesity levels, especially in the developed world. Thus, this study intends to explore the empirical and socio-economic antecedents of human obesity across countries using six global indexes. Methods: This study used the data of 40 countries between 1975 to 2018 and used the Panel FGLS Regression with the quadratic specification. Findings: The results showed that health and food indicators increase global human obesity, environment and education indicators decrease global human obesity, and economic and social indicators follow an inverted U-shaped pattern in affecting global human obesity. Originality: Previous studies have used infant mortality and life expectancy as the major health indicator in determining the standard of living while overlooking global human obesity as a major deterrent to welfare. This study has provided a holistic assessment of the causes of obesity in global contexts.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it