MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159834274 · doi:10.3138/cpp.39.4.517

Senior Poverty in Canada: A Decomposition Analysis

2013· article· en· W2159834274 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tammy Schirle

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyPoverty rateDemographic economicsEconomicsAssertionPoverty reductionSocioeconomicsEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using 1977–79, 1994–96, and 2006–08 data from the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) and Survey of Labour and Income Dynamics (SLID), I conduct a decomposition analysis of senior poverty rates to determine whether changes in seniors’ characteristics can help explain historical changes in senior poverty rates. I find that increases in the educational attainment of seniors significantly reduced senior poverty, but can only explain a small portion of the reduction in poverty rates between 1977–79 and 1994–96. I find that reductions in the extent to which age and independent living place seniors at risk of poverty significantly and substantially reduced senior poverty rates. Overall, the results support the assertion that retirement income policy is an important determinant of senior poverty in Canada.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.191 · 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.

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

Citations20
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicHousing, Finance, and NeoliberalismFrench-language works237,207