Frontier Firms, Productivity Dispersion and Aggregate Productivity Growth in Canada
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Labour productivity growth in the business sector in Canada fell off after 2000. This article examines how innovation, innovation diffusion across firms, and business dynamism affected the productivity slowdown. The article found that both innovation and diffusion of innovation declined in Canada after 2000, contributing to the decline in labour productivity growth in that period. However, their relative contribution to the productivity slowdown is sensitive to the methods adopted. The results from a productivity decomposition into contributions of frontier firms (defined as the top 10 per cent most productive firms in an industry) and non-frontier firms show that the slowdown in the diffusion of innovation is a main source of the productivity slowdown after 2000. In contrast, the results from a stochastic frontier analysis show that the decline in innovation is the main source of the productivity slowdown after 2000. Finally, this article found that resource reallocation declined in Canadian firms after 2000, contributing to the decline in aggregate labour productivity growth in the business sector in that period.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it