MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

CROSS‐NATIONAL DIFFERENCES IN INCOME MOBILITY: EVIDENCE FROM CANADA, THE UNITED STATES, GREAT BRITAIN AND GERMANY

2009· article· en· W2127486919 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wen‐Hao Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Income and Wealth · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarningsEconomicsDemographic economicsGovernment (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a standardized dataset, this paper compares the differences in income mobility among four countries—Canada, the United States, Great Britain and Germany—during the 1990s and early 2000s. The results suggest that, in general, there exist diverse levels of income mobility across the four countries. Although the precise magnitudes of the differences are sensitive to the measurement method used, incomes in Britain are by far the most mobile. Our findings also reveal country‐specific driving forces that underlie income mobility. The stabilizing effects of government transfers are most pronounced in Canada. In Germany, it is the progressive tax system that offsets earnings variations and results in smaller changes in longitudinal incomes. Moreover, we also discover that demographic factors provided only limited explanation of differences in income mobility.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations51
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Income and WealthSame topicIntergenerational and Educational Inequality StudiesFrench-language works237,207