Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this thesis, I compared income, consumption, savings, dwelling ownership and equity between immigrant families and Canadian born families.I studied the families' consumption behaviour and labour supply under credit constraint.In the first chapter of this thesis,the income, consumption and savings behaviour of immigrant and Canadian-born households are analysed using data from the Family Expenditure Surveys (FAMEX) of Statistics Canada for the years of 1969, 1974, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1990 and 1992.Immigrant households have significantly lower income and consumption levels compared to Canadian-born households.Savings are generally found to be similar between immigrant and Canadian-born households.There are no clear differences in the saving rates between immigrant and Canadianborn households.There are no significant changes in income, savings, or changes in assets as immigrants stay longer in Canada.The second chapter of this thesis analyses an intertemporal labor supply model for immigrant families allowing for the possibility of credit constraints.The withinperiod MRS condition for the wife's hours and family consumption and the interperiod Euler equation are estimated using the Canada's Family Expenditure Survey from 1984-1992.The results indicate that recent cohorts of married immigrant women work longer hours than earlier arrival cohorts and Canadian-born wives.Immigrant wives from non-traditional source countries work about 100 hours longer and have about $5 lower hourly wage rates than those from the UK, US, North and West Europe and the Canadian-born wives.The immigrant families are more likely to be credit constrained.The credit constraint is important for immigrant families food iii
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.037 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".