MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112408171

LongitudinaL Patterns of ParticiPation in the sociaL security disabiLity insurance and suPPLementaL security income Programs for PeoPLe with disabiLities

2011· article· en· W2112408171 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kalman Rupp, Gerald F. Riley

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisability insuranceSocial securityQuarter (Canadian coin)PaymentDisability benefitsCohortSurvey of Income and Program ParticipationHealth and Retirement StudyActuarial scienceLongitudinal dataMedicineDemographyGerontologyBusinessDemographic economicsFinanceEconomicsGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Longitudinal access to disability benefits is affected by interactions in benefit eligibility between the Disability Insurance (DI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) programs and lags arising from processing time in receiving the first payment. Administrative records show that a quarter of the calendar year-2000 cohort of first-ever working-age disability awardees were involved with both programs over a 60-month period, indicating a higher degree of program interaction than apparent from cross-sectional data. Nonbeneficiary status is three times more prevalent 60 months after entry among those who entered SSI first compared with DI entrants, as a result of exits that are due to the SSI means test. Over half of new awardees qualifying for both DI and SSI benefits are eligible for SSI during 4 or 5 months of the 5-month DI waiting period, but many do not receive their first SSI payment until later because of lags in final award decisions.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207