MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nobel Prize in Economics: retrospectove analysis and prediction of laureates

2023· article· en· W4409741111 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Olesia Totska

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Gestão & Tecnologia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of California, San DiegoUniversity of California, Santa BarbaraLeonard N. Stern School of Business, New York UniversityToulouse School of EconomicsLondon School of Economics and Political ScienceNorthwestern UniversityYork UniversityUniversity of PennsylvaniaUniversitetet i OsloUniversity of California, Los AngelesUniversity of MinnesotaPrinceton UniversityMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyYale University
KeywordsEconomicsMathematical economicsNeoclassical economicsPhilosophyPositive economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of the article is to analyze retrospective data on the laureates of the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel for the years 1969-2022 and to try to predict three parameters of 2023: the number of scientists who will receive the award; the part of the world in which the place of work of the laureate(s) is located; age of laureate / average age of laureates. During the years 1969–2022, the prize was awarded 54 times, and 92 people became its laureates. 74 awardees are affiliated with North America. The age of most scientists at the time of awarding was from 61 to 70 years. According to the obtained forecast trend models, in 2023 the laureates of the prize will be 3 people, representatives of higher education institutions from North America, whose average age will be in the range of 61–70 years.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.376
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.117 · 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.

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Gestão & TecnologiaSame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchFrench-language works237,207