MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6928000212 · doi:10.34989/san-2024-10

Assessing global potential output growth: April 2024

2024· article· en· W6928000212 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueBank of Canada Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEarly Modern Spanish Literature
Canadian institutionsBank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPotential outputProductivityWorkforceCapital (architecture)Total factor productivityHuman capitalConsumption (sociology)Capital accumulationAsset (computer security)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This note presents the annual update of Bank of Canada staff estimates for growth in global potential output. These estimates serve as key inputs to the analysis supporting the April 2024 Monetary Policy Report. Global potential output growth is assessed to have mostly recovered from its COVID-19 pandemic low, rising from 2.1% in 2020 to an estimated 3.0% in 2024.1 This increase is largely driven by a recovery in oil-importing emerging-market economies (EMEs), which are experiencing a gradual easing of pandemic-related downward pressures on capital accumulation and total factor productivity (TFP) growth (Chart 1 and Chart 2). Potential output growth has mostly returned to pre-pandemic average levels in all regions except China, where it is estimated to have steadily declined. Looking ahead, we expect global potential output growth to edge down to 2.9% in 2027 (Table 1). This modest decrease mainly reflects slowing growth in trend labour input (TLI) amid the rapid aging of the global population. Aging is also expected to weigh on labour productivity, although in some countries, shifts in the age composition of the workforce toward more productive cohorts may help dampen the effects (Guénette and Shao, forthcoming).2 Compared with last year’s assessment, global potential output growth has been revised up by 0.2 percentage points (pps), on average, over 2023–26. This mostly reflects stronger-than-expected capital accumulation in oil-exporting economies in addition to positive revisions to trend labour force participation in the United States and oil-importing EMEs.

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)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.006

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBank of Canada ResearchSame topicEarly Modern Spanish LiteratureFrench-language works237,207