MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7099413230

FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS 21 ECONOMIC REVIEW FOURTH QUARTER 1997

2015· article· en· W7099413230 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStrong Light-Matter Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Interest rateWork (physics)Business cycleNational Income and Product AccountsMonetary policyMeasures of national income and output
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Societies would prefer a steady growth path for their national income of, say, 3 percent every year to one that delivers a 3 percent growth rate on average, but with zigzags from, say, 12 percent one year to –6 percent the next. Consequently, they typically demand that policymakers eliminate undesired economic fluctuations.1 It is not surprising, then, that the understanding of business cycles has always captured the interest of economists and has inspired some of their best work. The work of John Maynard Keynes and Milton Friedman went a long way in defining the terms and identifying the issues that a suc-cessful theory of economic fluctuations ought to

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.789

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2360.143

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStrong Light-Matter InteractionsFrench-language works237,207