MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1528759257

Private Pensions and Income Security in Old Age: An Uncertain Future -- Conference Report

2007· article· en· W1528759257 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Kpessa-Whyte

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial and Economic Dimensions of an Aging Population Research Papers · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPensionPrivate pensionJurisdictionOrder (exchange)PovertyOld Age SecuritySocial securityActuarial scienceBusinessPolitical scienceEconomicsPublic economicsEconomic growthFinanceSociologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By all measures the private pension system in Canada is in difficulty. One estimate suggests that at the end of 2005 there were significant funding shortfalls in about three quarters of the traditional defined benefit pension plans that fall under federal jurisdiction in Canada. In order to discuss how vulnerable the current system is, to identify possible directions of reform, and to consider how to implement them, the conference on “Private Pensions and Income Security in Old Age: An Uncertain Future” brought together researchers, those who design and manage pension plans, and those responsible for pension policy, both from Canada and abroad. It was organized by the SEDAP Research Program and held in Hamilton, Ontario, in November 2006. This paper summarizes the presentations that were given in 10 conference sessions, covering issues such as pension regulations, poverty and income security in old age, policy options, reform obstacles, and international perspectives. Many of the conference presentations, including tables and graphs, are available on SEDAP’s website

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.005

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 head0.208
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial and Economic Dimensions of an Aging Population Research PapersSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207