The Employment Impacts of Active Labour Market Policy: The Case of SSP Plus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet article, nous évaluons l’impact d’une composante importante du Projet d’autosuffisance (PAS), une vaste politique canadienne d’intervention sur le marché du travail. Nous nous concentrons donc sur le PAS-plus, qui offre à d’ex-prestataires de l’aide sociale des services reliés à l’emploi et un intéressant supplément de revenu. Nous avons considéré deux façons d’expliquer les effets positifs supplémentaires du PAS-plus sur le taux d’emploi à plein temps: a) le PAS-plus a incité plus d’individus à occuper un emploi à plein temps; b) l’accès à des services reliés à l’emploi a accru la probabilité que ceux qui étaient admissibles au supplément travaillent à temps plein. Ensuite, grâce à la méthode d’appariement par calcul des propensions, nous avons pu démontrer que l’impact était le résultat des deux facteurs; toutefois, le deuxième ne s’applique qu’aux individus qui n’auraient pas occupé un emploi à temps plein s’ils n’avaient pas pu profiter des mesures incitatives du PAS-plus.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.001 |
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".