Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1988 marginal personal income tax rates changed in Canada, for some individuals by reasonably substantial amounts. In this note a large sample of tax‐filer data is examined and the conclusion is drawn that, when attention is paid to the possible confounding of marginal tax rate and non‐linear income effects, there is no convincing evidence that the tax rate changes affected contributions to Registered Retirement Saving Plans (RRSPs). Est‐ce que l'aplatissement des taux d'imposition influence les contributions au REER? En 1988, les taux marginaux d'imposition du revenu personnel ont changé au Canada, et, pour certaines personnes, ces changements ont été substantiels. Cette note examine un grand échantillon de rapports d'impôts et en arrive à la conclusion que, quand on prend en compte le mélange possible des effets du taux marginal d'imposition et des effets de revenu non‐linéaires, il n'y a pas de résultats qui montrent de façon probante que les changements dans les taux d'imposition ont influencé les contributions au REER.
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 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".