MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132623372

Conditions for the Most Robust Poverty Comparisons Using the Alkire-Foster Family of Measures

2011· preprint· en· W2132623372 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gastón Yalonetzky

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford) · 2011
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilInternational Development Research CentreUnited Nations Development ProgrammeUNICEFRobertson FoundationAustralian Agency for International Development
KeywordsEuropean unionPovertyEconometricsMathematicsDominance (genetics)Stochastic dominancePoverty thresholdPsychological resilienceRobustness (evolution)StatisticsEconomicsPsychologySocial psychologyEconomic growth
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>In the burgeoning literature on multidimensional poverty indices, the Alkire-Foster (AF) measures stand out for their resilience in identifying the multidimensionally poor with cut-off criteria covering the spectrum from the union approach to the intersection approach. The intuitiveness and easy applicability of the measures’ identification and aggregation methods are reflected in the increasing use of the AF measures in poverty measurement, as well as in other fields. This paper extends the dominance results derived by Lasso de la Vega (2009) and Alkire and Foster (2010) for the adjusted headcount ratio and develops a new condition whose fulfillment ensures the robustness of comparisons using the adjusted headcount ratio for any choice of multidimensional cut-off and for any weights and poverty lines. The paper then derives a first-order dominance condition for the whole Alkire-Foster family (that is, for continuous variables).</p>

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.177 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford)Same topicIncome, Poverty, and InequalityFrench-language works237,207