Remittances as aid following major sudden‐onset natural disasters
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
There is a general assumption, based on macroeconomic studies, that remittances will rise following major sudden-onset natural disasters. This is confirmed by a few assessments involving country-specific research, and usually short-term data. This study, questioning conventional wisdom, reviewed and graphed annual and quarterly remittance flows using International Monetary Fund and World Bank data from 2000-14 for 12 countries that confronted 18 major natural disasters. It found that, regardless of event type, annual remittances rose steadily from 2000-14 except for after the 2008-09 financial crisis. Post disaster, there was a quarterly increase in the majority of cases (confirming previous research) but there was seldom an annual increase in the year of the disaster greater than the average annual increase in 2000-14. It appears that remittance senders rush to provide assistance after a natural disaster, but since their own financial situation has not changed, the immediate increase is compensated by a later decrease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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