MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045211808 · doi:10.3406/oss.2003.931

La pauvreté en France et au Québec : une comparaison à l’aide de l’indice multidimensionnel de pauvreté-richesse

2003· article· en· W2045211808 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
François Gardes, Simon Langlois

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté Société et Solidarité · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConsumption (sociology)PovertyDimension (graph theory)EconomicsClothingBoomWelfare economicsDemographic economicsGeographySociologyEconomic growthMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article defines a multidimensional poverty indicator which makes it possible to compare, over time and between two countries, the consumption patterns and lifestyle of populations who live in severe or partial poverty. This indicator integrates a purely financial dimension of poverty into a behavioural dimension that is measured by the share of food expense. There are many similar characteristics between the behaviours of French and Québec households. The transversal evolution of budgetary coefficients of goods and services thus reflects the growing mercantilism marking our two societies. Several interesting contradictions between the transversal and temporal evolutions can be observed in two important items - clothing and housing. Moreover, based on the observation of different households in the same period, the evolution of consumption cannot always be forecast without bias. The economic crisis and then the boom period have affected households in a different way during their life cycles, thus intensifying the differences between generations. Lastly, the evolution of consumption patterns during the life cycle is slower for poor households which are thus affected by a degree of inertia in their consumption, making it more difficult for them to move closer to the consumption patterns of more privileged socio-economic classes. The middle class, for its part, is characterized by a strong dynamic of consumption.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.547
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté Société et SolidaritéSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207