MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1594475927

주요 국가의 사회투자정책 현황과 특징

2007· article· ko· W1594475927 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venue한국사회과학연구 · 2007
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnergy and Environmental Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial policySocial WelfareWelfareEconomicsInvestment (military)PopulationEconomic growthDevelopment economicsPublic economicsPolitical scienceMarket economySociologyPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many countries, social investment viewpoints are very much emphasized in diverse areas of social policies. This trends are related with many factors, such as high unemployment rates, growing numbers of the old population, and inefficiencies of the old social welfare systems. Even though Korea is at the stage where the net level of welfare expenditure should be increased, Korean society is also facing the above mentioned social problems which should be solved by new social policies. Thus, it is helpful for Korean society to review the realities, problems, and featuring characteristics of social investment policies among major countries where those policies were already implemented, in order to get useful framework to evaluate many policy alternatives Korean society might adopt. This study reviews social investment policies among western welfare countries according to the three major welfare regimes-liberal, conservative, and social democratic. The findings show that countries in liberal welfare regime, such as Canada, England, and the US, increase the level of total expenditures spending social investment policies and emphasize the role of private sectors providing welfare services. Conservative welfare regime also strongly underscores the policies focusing on social investment viewpoints. Sweden and Denmark, the countries representing social democratic welfare regime do not show the dramatic change in old welfare systems, but try to increase the efficiencies of welfare systems and the number of service providers. The study also analyses social investment policies among major western countries according to the policy objectives-children, women, and the elderly. Children are the most important welfare beneficiaries in the social investment policies. Care services and educational services for younger children are very much emphasized in most countries. For women, many institutional changes and new services increasing the possibilities managing work and family are found in many countries. Actually the services for children and for women are interwound with each other. The polices for the elderly include job training services and social care services. In most countries these policies for the elderly are considered as highly urgent policies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.253 · 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