Bibliographic record
Abstract
【The instability in the current financial market caused consumers a lot of difficulties in their financial decision making. The purpose of this study is to classify the changes in household portfolios during the economic crisis under IMF-trusteeship (IMF Crisis hereafter), and to examine the characteristics of the households according to the types of household portfolio changes. The data were taken from 1996 and 1999 Korean Household Panel Studies, and 1,293 households were selected for the final analysis. Methods of analysis included frequencies, percentages, Chi-square tests, F-tests, and t-tests. Major findings are as follows: 1. In the midst of the financial market changes during the period of the IMF crisis, consumers tended to manage their household portfolio differently according to their household characteristics. 2. The changes of household portfolio can be classified into two different types: the changed type (44.4%) and the unchanged type(55.6%). There are significant differences in the level of wealth, family life cycle stage, housing tenure, and the household head's job, between the changed type and the unchanged type. The family members of the unchanged type are more likely to be older and relatively wealthy compared with the families in the changed type. 3. The changes of household portfolio can be further classified into six different types: the unchanged-liquidity type (21%), the unchanged-multiplication type (24.6%), the unchanged-insurance type (9.8%), the changed-to-liquidity type (13.9%), the changed-to-multiplication type (13.0%), and the changed-to-insurance type (17.5%). There are significant differences in income level, wealth level, family life cycle stage, housing tenure, and the job of household head among the six types of changes.】
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.005 |
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".