MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3122413759

Multidimensional Poverty Measurement and Analysis: Chapter 5 - The Alkire-Foster Counting Methodology

2015· preprint· en· W3122413759 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sabina Alkire, James E. Foster, Suman Seth, María Emma Santos, Paola Ballón

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBundesministerium für Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und EntwicklungAustralian Agency for International DevelopmentUniversity of OxfordInternational Development Research CentreEconomic and Social Research CouncilInternational Fine Particle Research InstituteUnited Nations Development ProgrammeRobertson Foundation
KeywordsMathematicsRigourSection (typography)EconometricsMeasure (data warehouse)AppealIndex (typography)StatisticsAxiomComputer scienceData miningPolitical scienceGeometry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter provides a systematic overview of the Alkire-Foster multidimensional measurement methodology with an emphasis on the Adjusted Headcount Ratio denoted <strong>(<em>M</em><sub>0</sub>)</strong>. The chapter is divided into seven sections. The first shows how this measure combines the practical appeal of the counting tradition with the rigor of the axiomatic one. The second sets out the identification of who is poor using the dual-cutoff approach, and the third outlines the aggregation method used to construct the Adjusted Headcount Ratio. In the fourth, we take stock and present the main distinctive characteristics of the Adjusted Headcount Ratio, whereas the fifth section presents its useful, consistent partial indices or components. To illustrate, we present a case study using the global Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) in the sixth section. The final section presents the members of the AF class of measures that can be constructed in less common situations where data are cardinal.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.168
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford)Same topicIncome, Poverty, and InequalityFrench-language works237,207