Living Standard, Living Level and Economic Wellbeing of Older Persons: Similarity and Differences in Measuring These Concepts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The number of older persons is increasing throughout the world and the consequences of ageing population; specifically in economics of aging was deserved to be being attention. The main issue in economics of aging is the way in indentifying the economically vulnerable group and how the allocate government’s limited resources to the needed group. However, various methods, either using objective approach (income, consumption, net flow, net worth) or subjective approach (self-rated income adequacy, perceived financial satisfaction) were employed to identify the vulnerable group. This paper aims to link concept of economic status, economic well being with living level and living standard. It recommended that those who want to study the concept of economic well being should start from the understanding of living level and living standard. Key words: Older person; living level and living standardResume: Le nombre de personnes âgees est en augmentation partout dans le monde et les consequences du vieillissement de la population, en particulier dans l'economie du vieillissement, meritaient d'etre suivies de pres. La question principale dans l'economie du vieillissement est la facon d'identifier le groupe economiquement vulnerable et comment allouer les ressources limitees du gouvernement au groupe de besoin. Or, des methodes diverses, soit en utilisant l'approche objective (le revenu, la consommation, le flux net, la valeur nette) ou l'approche subjective (l'adequation du revenu auto-evalue, la satisfaction financiere percue) ont ete utilisees pour identifier les groupes vulnerables. Ce document vise a relier la notion de statut economique, du bien-etre economique avec le niveau de vie et le standard vie. Il a recommande que ceux qui voulaient etudier la notion de bien-etre economique devraient commencer par la comprehension du niveau de vie et du standard de vie.Mots-cles: personnes âgees, standard de vie et niveau de vie
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".