Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peu de travaux ont porté sur la relation entre la taille des nations et la distribution des revenus, à l’exception de l’ouvrage pionnier de Peter Katzenstein, Small States in World Markets (1985), qui démontrait que les petites nations européennes avaient une capacité supérieure de se concerter et de concilier la croissance économique et une généreuse protection sociale. Nous revisitons cette question pour les années récentes (1990-2019) et avec un plus grand nombre de cas (20 pays de l’OCDE), afin d’établir plus systématiquement la relation entre la taille d’une nation et la distribution des revenus. Nous démontrons que, toutes choses égales par ailleurs, les petites nations réussissent mieux à contrer les inégalités et la pauvreté, même quand on contrôle les facteurs habituellement associés à la redistribution, comme la représentation proportionnelle, l’ouverture commerciale, le pouvoir de la gauche et le type et la hauteur des dépenses sociales.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".