MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W616368880 · doi:10.3233/jem-130380

Correction for variations in capacity utilization in the measurement of productivity growth: A non-parametric approach

2013· article· en· W616368880 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wulong Gu, Weimin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Economic and Social Measurement · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic Growth and Productivity
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityParametric statisticsEconomicsEconometricsComputer scienceStatisticsMacroeconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The multifactor productivity growth estimate published by statistical agencies should be corrected for the effect of the short run variations in capacity utilization for such estimate to be a measure of technological progress. But such correction is not normally made as the rate of capacity utilization is often not observed. This paper develops a nonparametric approach for adjusting multifactor productive growth measure for variation in capacity utilization over time. In the approach developed here, the capital utilization measure is derived from the economic theory of production and is estimated by comparing the ex-post return with the ex-ante expected return on capital. The approach offers a practical solution that can be used by statistical agencies to adjust for capacity utilization in their multifactor productivity growth measure. The nonparametric approach is implemented using the data for the manufacturing sector from the Canadian Productivity Program of Statistics Canada, and is found to correct for the bias from the variation in capacity utilization in that sector.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.094 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Economic and Social MeasurementSame topicEconomic Growth and ProductivityFrench-language works237,207