MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031751920

Minimum Income Proposal in Québec

2011· article· en· W2031751920 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nicholas‐James Clavet, Jean‐Yves Duclos, Guy Lacroix

Bibliographic record

VenueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyGovernment (linguistics)Work (physics)Social exclusionOrder (exchange)Poverty rateIncome SupportPublic economicsEconomicsBusinessDemographic economicsLabour economicsEconomic growthFinanceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2002 the Government of Quebec enacted Bill 112, known as An Act to Combat Poverty and Social Exclusion. It has also instituted an advisory committee whose role is to advise the government on policies that may have a direct or indirect impact on poverty and social exclusion. The Committee published a series of recommendations in 2009 that more or less amount to a Guaranteed Minimum Income scheme. We investigate the likely consequences of the recommendations on employment and income of all individuals residing in the Province of Quebec. We do this through the use of a behavioural micro-simulation model. Our results show that the proposed recommendations would have a large negative impact on hours of work and labor force participation – and mostly so among low-income workers. The recommendations would involve outlays in the order of $2.2 billion per year.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0400.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉrudit documents and data repository (Érudit Consortium, University of Montreal)Same topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207