Comment les familles et les personnes seules reagissent-elles aux licenciements? Un eclairage canadien
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A l'aide d'un vaste ensemble de donnees longitudinales canadiennes, nous examinons si, en reaction au licenciement que subissent les maris, les gains des femmes et des adolescents augmentent. Dans le cas des adolescents, nous ne relevons pour ainsi dire aucun indice d'un , mais nous constatons que, dans le cas des familles sans enfants en age de travailler, les gains des epouses compensent au cinquieme environ la perte de revenu du travail des epoux cinq ans apres leur licenciement. Nous comparons aussi les pertes correspondantes a long terme des maris et des hommes seuls. Le premier de ces groupes peut etre geographiquement moins mobile que le second, mais nous pouvons voir que l'un et l'autre essuient a long terme a peu pres les memes pertes de revenu du travail. On doit ajouter que les pertes de revenu (avant et apres impot) sont tres semblables d'un groupe a l'autre. Toutefois, comme les hommes seuls ont un revenu bien moindre avant leur licenciement, le choc en revenu relatif est bien plus grand pour eux que pour les maris licencies (et leur famille)
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 | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".