Impact of Microfinance on Poverty: Qualitative Analysis for Grameen Bank Borrowers
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
Poverty is economic, social, political and even moral issue all over the world. Microfinance has been designed to eliminate poverty and may help marginal people to materialize their dreams. Microfinance has been formalized primarily in Bangladesh with this concept. Grameen Bank (GB) has been serving large number of people below poverty level here. Initially, microfinance institutions have been supported by the Government or Donor assuming its positive impact on borrowers. However, ambiguous impacts have been reported in several studies that make microfinance questionable. Therefore, this study intent to measure the impact of microfinance on GB borrowers through the process of qualitative changes in borrowers lives. The process has been measured by some case studies for participant and non-participant borrowers using Modified Household Economic Portfolio Model (M - HEPM). Our qualitative analysis shows that microfinance makes positive changes in the process of borrowers lives observed through financial and activity diaries of the borrowers.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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