Price and cost competitiveness. Quarterly report on the price and cost competitiveness of the European Union and its Member States. Fourth quarter 2000. ECFIN/44/4/00-EN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The euro against major international currencies:• During the fourth quarter of 1999, the US dollar appreciated by almost.6% against the euro.The Japanese yen strengthened by 9% and the pound sterling by 4% against the euro.The Swiss franc was stable against the euro.In all, the nominal effective exchange of the euro depreciftted by some 4% against the currencies of 13 industrialised countries.• The nominal effective exchange rate of the euro has de}>reciated by about 11% since the changeover.This depreciation has brought the nominal effective exchange rate of the euro area to its lowest level since mid-1997.Relative cost and price indicators: international developments• Together with subdued price and costl developments, exchange rate developments led to an additional gain in• the cost competitiveness of euro area producerS by 1% in the• fourth quarter of 1999, on top of the 8% gain in the first three quarters of the year.In terms of relative unit labour costs, the cost competitiveness of the EUR11 is• at its most favourable since 1985.• Relative unit labour costs in EUR11 .compared to the USA are now 18% below the 1987-98 average.Relative to Japan, unit labour costs •are 22% below their 1987-9~ average .. Relative cost and price indicators: intra-EMU developments .
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.020 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".