The Effect of Poverty Status and Public Housing Residency on Residential Energy Consumption in the U.S.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use the U.S. Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) for 2001 and 2005 to estimate household energy demand as a function of a composite energy price. We find a short-run price elasticity of -0.6 and a short-run income elasticity of 0.04 in the full sample, with poverty-level households having slightly higher price elasticities and lower income elasticities. Public housing residents use about 10% less energy than non-residents, a difference that persists despite a large set of household and dwelling controls and even with the analysis restricted to poverty-level households, multifamily housing occupants, and renters. Thus, the findings suggest that energy conservation measures undertaken by housing authorities have been effective at reducing energy consumption relative to similarly-situated households. Analysis by fuel type and use suggests that the relatively low energy use of public housing residents among multifamily renters is driven by their lower use of natural gas for space heating, and electricity and natural gas for appliances.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it