Canada-U.S. ICT Investment in 2011: The Gap Narrows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growth in labour productivity determines growth in wages (and therefore living standards) in the long-run. Growth in information and communications technology (ICT) investment hastens the pace of labour productivity growth and, consequently, it affects the development of wages and living standards. This report, which is based on the updating of the Centre for the Study of Living Standards (CSLS) ICT database for 2011, investigates the Canada-U.S. ICT gap for the business sector over the between 1987 and 2011, with special attention paid to the 2000-2011 period. We found that the Canada-U.S. ICT gap narrowed in 2011 across all its measures including ICT investment per worker, ICT capital stock per worker, ICT investment as a share of nominal business sector GDP, and ICT investment as a share of total fixed, non-residential business sector investment. Most significantly, the ICT investment per worker gap was 42.2 per cent in 2011, down 3.1 percentage points lower from 46.5 per cent in 2010. Canada’s relative success was the result of stronger nominal ICT investment in 2011 compared to the United States, and an
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".