The experimental consumer price index for elderly Americans (CPI-E): 1982-2007
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kenneth J. Stewart The Consumer Price Index (CPI) measures the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a representative market basket of consumer goods and services. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) publishes measures of price change for two official population groups. The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) represents the spending habits of about 87 percent of the population of the United States,1 and the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W), a subset of the CPI-U population, represents about 32 percent of the U.S. population. As the U.S. population ages, policymakers have become increasingly interested in issues facing older Americans.2 In 1987, Congress directed BLS to begin calculating a consumer price index for the elderly. In response, BLS developed an experimental consumer price index for Americans 62 years of age and older. Commonly called the CPI-E, the index was reconstructed to 1982; hence, CPI-E data are now available for 25 years, from December 1982 through December 2007.3 The experimental CPI-E has moved somewhat differently than the CPI-U and the CPI-W over the last quarter century. From December 1982 to December 2007, the experimental CPI-E rose 126.5 percent, compared with increases of 115.2 percent for the CPI-U and 110.0 percent for the CPI-W. That translates into average annual increases of 3.3 percent, 3.1 percent, and 3.0 percent for the CPI-E, CPI-U, and CPI-W, respectively.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.017 |
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".