Individualizing Social Risks: International and Legal Dimensions of Privatization of Pension Schemes in Latin America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Depuis dix ans, le modèle chilien de privatisation des régimes de pension s'est répandu en Amérique latine et suscite beaucoup d'intérêt sur le plan international. Ceci soulève des questions importantes quant à l'individualisation des risques sociaux et à l'érosion des bases de la sécurité sociale fondées sur les droits de la personne. Cet article examine les caractéristiques des régimes privatisés de pensions en Amérique latine et explore certains facteurs qui ont motivé la tendance vers la privatisation. Les approches préconisées par la Banque mondiale et l'Organisation internationale du travail pour la réforme des régimes de pension sont également comparées. Les normes juridiques et les principes généralement reconnus pour l'élaboration des régimes de pension fournissent une toile de fond pour l'examen de questions entourant la mise en œuvre de régimes privatisés, notamment le rôle changeant de l'État relativement à la protection.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".