Trend in the Distribution of Income Between Labor and Capital in Countries with a Low Share of Labor in GDP
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
The work is devoted to obtaining quantitative estimates of trends in the distribution of income between labor and capital in countries with a low share of labor in GDP. UN data was used for a set of European countries, post-Soviet countries, Israel, Canada, the USA and Turkey. The lowest labor share levels were observed in Ireland, Kyrgyzstan, Romania and Turkey. To assess trends in the share of labor in GDP on the rate of economic growth, linear econometric models of changes in the share of labor compensation in GDP by year in the period from 2012 to 2021 were built. Hungary, Ireland, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Ukraine have seen a decline in the share of labor in GDP. In Uzbekistan, this trend is weakly expressed. Germany, Greece, Iceland, Luxembourg, the Czech Republic, Switzerland and Estonia have seen an increase in the labor share of GDP. In Germany and Switzerland this trend is weakly expressed. An increase in the share of labor in GDP is observed in countries such as Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, Georgia, Israel, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Norway, Poland, the Russian Federation, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Turkmenistan and Turkey. Moreover, this trend is weakly expressed in Belarus and Turkey. There are no significant trends in the redistribution of income between labor and capital in countries such as Albania, Malta, North Macedonia, Tajikistan and Montenegro. Trends in the redistribution of income between labor and capital can be determined by institutional conditions in the country’s 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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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