MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146224013 · doi:10.7202/1011540ar

Microsimuler l’avenir des retraites en France : l’exemple du modèle Destinie

2012· article· fr· W2146224013 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Didier Blanchet

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers québécois de démographie · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le modèle Destinie est un modèle de microsimulation dynamique dont la construction avait débuté à l’INSEE dans les années 1990. Son champ d’application principal est la prospective des retraites. Il a été notamment mobilisé pour éclairer les effets des réformes intervenues en France depuis 1993. Cet article présente le contexte dans lequel sa première version a été construite, les principaux choix qui ont été retenus pour cette construction et les diverses applications qui en ont été faites. Il dresse un bilan de ces applications et présente les améliorations apportées par la nouvelle version du modèle, opérationnelle depuis 2011.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.009
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers québécois de démographieSame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207