MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060134756 · doi:10.3905/jpe.2005.490424

Retirement Security

2005· article· en· W2060134756 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bradley D. Sharp, Catherine E. Vance

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Private Equity · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBankruptcyQuarter (Canadian coin)Perspective (graphical)BusinessSocial securityNothingFinanceActuarial scienceEconomicsMarket economyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, an uncounted number of retirees have had their pensions and health benefits slashed or eliminated as their former employers have sought protection in the nation9s bankruptcy courts. The number of people affected could easily exceed a quarter of a million, to say nothing of the cuts non-bankrupt companies have made. In this article we attempt to help shape and encourage a full and robust public discourse on this important issue by offering a fresh perspective on retiree benefits and the financial problems that have plagued the benefits designed for, and promised to, retirees.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.260
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Private EquitySame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207