MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Does the distribution of income between labor and capital affect economic growth?

2022· article· en· W4309008589 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elena Basovskaya, Leonid Basovskiy

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Research and Development Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Development and Digital Transformation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsDistribution (mathematics)Income distributionProductivityLabour economicsWageWage shareCapital (architecture)Human capitalDemographic economicsMacroeconomicsEfficiency wageMarket economyGeographyInequality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The work is devoted to obtaining quantitative estimates of the impact of the dis-tribution of income between labor and capital on the rate of economic growth in the modern world. We used UN data on a set of European countries, post-Soviet countries, Israel, Canada, the USA and Turkey. To assess the impact of the distribution of income between labor and capital on economic growth rates, linear econometric models of the dependence of economic growth rates on the share of labor force in GDP by years of the period from 2007 to 2019 built. The obtained results showed that the relationship between the rates of economic growth and the share of labor force in GDP in the mod-ern world is not significant, the influence of the share of labor force in GDP on econom-ic growth is negative, but declining obliquely, in recent years it has become insignificant. it can be expected that in the 2020s this influence may become positive. Outpacing wage growth rates can help increase labor productivity and accelerate economic growth in the transition to a post-industrial economy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 venueScientific Research and Development EconomicsSame topicEconomic Development and Digital TransformationFrench-language works237,207