{"id":"W2471371869","doi":"10.1016/j.jpubeco.2016.11.011","title":"Bunching at the kink: Implications for spending responses to health insurance contracts","year":2016,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Journal of Public Economics","topic":"Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics","field":"Social Sciences","cited_by":54,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"University of British Columbia","funders":"National Institute on Aging","keywords":"Counterfactual thinking; Economics; Context (archaeology); Incentive; Set (abstract data type); Object (grammar); Medicare Part D; Econometrics; Public economics; Actuarial science; Microeconomics; Prescription drug; Medical prescription; Computer science","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":false,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.003946849,0.00007734375,0.0001974805,0.00009562274,0.0007874981,0.0001718279,0.0004422278,0.00005229603,0.00001714355],"category_scores_gemma":[0.001408281,0.00005007516,0.0001107788,0.0001092984,0.00009237136,0.0004895308,0.00004131712,0.00008393443,0.000009117581],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.0008208717,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.0008511876,"about_ca_topic_candidate":false,"about_ca_topic_consensus":false,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.00007999736,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.003577984,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9987811,0.0001703108,0.0004803175,0.0001208327,0.00007645292,0.0003709322],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9976345,0.001095568,0.0006016098,0.0001762352,0.0002063405,0.0002857597],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00006148791,0.0000494121,0.7028611,0.000004615244,0.00006180241,3.34528e-7,0.006637903,0.00007030265,0.0003745039,0.2267351,0.005397319,0.05774605],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004547975,0.00008295862,0.7286435,0.00002073135,0.000004343732,0.00001166175,0.002614672,0.000008012428,0.000006718255,0.009283333,0.2587687,0.0001006014],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.8651333,0.000151444,0.00748762,0.1250871,0.0007281536,0.0002282543,0.00009794766,0.000008825807,0.001077272],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9938637,0.001097569,0.001442124,0.00188498,0.0005853217,0.000007474898,9.095169e-7,0.00001182628,0.001106088],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.2533714,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.6056879,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.08456020567782002,"score_gpt":0.3494598422167804,"score_spread":0.2648996365389604,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}