MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102773466 · doi:10.5430/ijfr.v6n4p134

Low Pension Participation among Minority Workers in the U.S.

2015· article· en· W2102773466 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sung David Chun, Wei Sun, Yeojun Caleb Chun

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Financial Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPensionSurvey of Income and Program ParticipationDemographic economicsMultivariate statisticsMultivariate analysisDemographyGerontologyActuarial sciencePsychologyBusinessEconomicsMedicineSociologyStatisticsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present study documents and models Latinos’ pension participation likelihood relative to non-Hispanic Whites and non-Hispanic Blacks. Multivariate regression methods were used to analyze data from the 1996 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) panel which was collected from April 1996 to March 2000. Results indicate that Hispanics and non-Hispanic Blacks were significantly less likely to participate in pension plans (defined contributions plans such as 401k and 403b) than non-Hispanic White Americans. In multivariate analyses where demographic background, industry and occupation characteristics, availability of affordable pension plans, and eligibility statuses were specified, there was still a significant net racial effect in predicting the DC pension participation likelihood.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.487
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.071 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Financial ResearchSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207