MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Le chômage involontaire de Keynes n’est-il que conjoncturel ? Un retour sur les débats autour de la formalisation du chômage keynésien

2022· preprint· fr· W4307119709 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nicolas Piluso, Edwin Le Héron, Édouard Cottin-Euziol

Bibliographic record

VenueInterventions économiques · 2022
Typepreprint
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Theory and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeynesian economicsUnemploymentEconomicsInvoluntary unemploymentFull employmentMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, nous cherchons à démontrer que l'idée communément admise dans les manuels de macroéconomie selon laquelle le chômage keynésien est simplement conjoncturel, est fallacieuse. Après avoir mis en évidence les lacunes des interprétations traditionnelles qui confinent le chômage keynésien à une perspective de court terme, nous montrons que plusieurs types de modèles macroéconomiques présentent des équilibres de chômage involontaire sur le long terme. En particulier, nous montrerons qu’il existe un grand nombre de cas où le plein-emploi peut ne pas être atteint malgré la flexibilité des prix et des salaires.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.329
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueInterventions économiquesSame topicEconomic Theory and PolicyFrench-language works237,207