Execution and Evaluation: Task Content, Labor Demand, and the Evaluator Pipeline

Li Gan

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: Measures of occupational AI exposure ask whether machines can perform a task, not which function the human supplies. I distinguish execution, producing a first-pass output, from evaluation, judging whether it is correct, and make the distinction measurable by scoring all 19,265 O*NET task statements under fixed rubrics. The execution score is reproducible across model coders and O*NET vintages. In a 200-task random audit it correlates 0.81 with the mean of four blinded human coders. It predicts each held-out coder's peers better than that coder does, though the coders disagree substantially among themselves. It adds only modest power beyond O*NET's evaluation activities. Employment growth is lower in execution-heavy white-collar occupations in every window since 2012; the gradient shows no post-2022 break and lies largely between occupational families. The Eloundou exposure gradient is steeper in 2022--2025 than in the pandemic window, but the design does not establish an AI effect. A near-term seniority test is null. If evaluative judgment is itself produced by execution practice, the supply of evaluators falls only after a cohort lag; that prediction remains untested.

Date: 2026-07, Revised 2026-10
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-ain
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.20807 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:2607.20807

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().