MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1528593268

Income Inequality and Low Income in Canada: an International Perspective

2005· preprint· en· W1528593268 on OpenAlexaffabout
John Myles, Garnett Picot

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2005
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic inequalityEconomicsIncome distributionLow incomeIncome in kindInequalityDemographic economicsNet national incomeComprehensive incomeIncome inequality metricsAdjusted gross incomeDistribution (mathematics)Total personal incomeAggregate incomeDevelopment economicsGross incomeLabour economicsPublic economicsState income tax
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides an overview of income inequality and low-income trends in Canada from an international perspective. It addresses a series of questions, including: - Is family income inequality rising in Canada after decades of stability? - Is Canada a low- or high-income inequality country? - Does Canada have a low or high low-income rate as compared to other western nations? - Does the tax/transfer system reduce low-income rates in Canada more than in the U.S. or in European countries? - Has the low-income rate and the depth of low income risen in Canada during the past two decades? - Does rising low income among immigrants significantly affect the aggregate low-income rate? - Do most spells of low income become long-term, and among which groups is persistent low income concentrated? The paper uses the results from a number of papers to address these questions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.022
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations33
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207