MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6989720557

Businesses take stock as uncertainty goes on

2019· article· en· W6989720557 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInsight (University of Cumbria) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional resilience and development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Stock (firearms)HarmCertaintyManufacturing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In his monthly column, Professor Frank Peck, of the University of Cumbria's Centre for Regional Economic Development, looks at how growth has been boosted by firms stockpiling ahead of the original Brexit date in March and how that may harm longer term productivity.
\n
\nAs we enter June, the one certainty faced by business is the reality of continued political uncertainty regarding the UK’s future relationship with Europe. It is now clear that many businesses have developed strategies to manage the risks and we have seen evidence of this in the first quarter of 2019. Growth figures for January to March, announced in May, showed that the economy grew by 1.8 per cent compared to the same quarter in the previous year, its fastest rate of growth since quarter three of 2017. Closer inspection of this data shows manufacturing output, in particular, up by 2.2 per cent on the previous quarter compared with much slower growth in services of only 0.3 per cent. This stronger performance in manufacturing has been attributed in part to the effects of contingency plans of manufacturing companies leading up to the end of March 2019.

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)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0170.011
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.015

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.164 · 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 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsight (University of Cumbria)Same topicRegional resilience and developmentFrench-language works237,207