MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149010276 · doi:10.1504/ijram.2007.014664

Foundational principles of welfare economics underlying the life quality index for efficient risk management

2007· article· en· W2149010276 on OpenAlexaff
Mahesh D. Pandey, Jatin Nathwani

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Risk Assessment and Management · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife expectancyPremiseEconomicsRisk analysis (engineering)Public economicsIndex (typography)Quality (philosophy)Harmony (color)WelfareManagement scienceKey (lock)Human Development IndexEnvironmental economicsHuman development (humanity)BusinessComputer scienceEconomic growthSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper provides the philosophical foundation and clarifies the methodological assumptions that form the basis of the Life Quality Index (LQI) as an innovation to promote efficient risk management practices. The basic premise is that enhancement of life safety is a fundamental human value. The LQI draws into account key social indicators as identified in the UN Human Development Reports with significant emphasis on income and life expectancy. The paper shows that the LQI model is in harmony with well-established principles of welfare economics as highlighted in the literature on economics and human development. Furthermore, the derivation of the LQI is shown to be consistent with the key operational requirements of utility theory and econometric modelling. The LQI has potential to be an effective and versatile tool to support social and economic cost-benefit analysis of engineering projects that have consequential impacts on individual welfare and the quality of life.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.485

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Risk Assessment and ManagementSame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207