Effect of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on GDP Growth of India in 2022: An Analysis
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
In this present era, artificial intelligence (AI) is a buzz word. With the increase in hype for AI and its increasing rate of application worldwide, it has raised a debate on the impact of AI on increase in growth rate, productivity and unemployment. Having said that, studies have shown AI is still at an infant stage. With the increase in the ability to understand context and reply in human language, it has surely paved its way towards an impeccable journey of transforming an economy with the increase in productivity, gross domestic product (GDP) and economic growth. The advancement may cause some setbacks in terms of labour force participation with higher demand for labour with certain skill set to be able to work with AI and hence increasing the unemployment rate as well as creating a widening gap between developing and developed countries. In this chapter, we aim to determine the effect of AI on GDP growth of India for the year 2022 and have selected terms of trade (ToT), human development index (HDI) and per capita real GDP for the year 2022 to understand its overall impact using secondary data. The results of the analysis show that ToT, global artificial intelligence (GAI) index, and HDI as explanatory variables significantly explain the variation in per capita real GDP.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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