Bibliographic record
Abstract
This document is the 2nd edition of the Net Social Expenditure paper published in 1999 (Adema, 1999). It contains an overview of net (after tax) public and private social expenditure indicators. These indicators have been developed to supplement available historical information on gross social expenditure trends by accounting for the varying impact of the tax system across countries. Tax systems can affect social spending in three ways: Governments levy direct taxes and social security contributions on cash transfers. Governments levy indirect taxes on goods and services bought by benefit recipients. Governments may award tax advantages similar to cash benefits and/or grant tax concessions aiming to stimulate the provision of private social benefits. The document summarises the methodological framework as previously developed, but extends coverage to eighteen countries for which information for 1997 is now available: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech ... Ce document est la 2ème édition du rapport sur les dépenses sociales nettes publié en 1999. Il comprend un exposé sur les indicateurs des dépenses sociales totales nettes (publiques et privées). Ces indicateurs ont été développés afin d’apporter un supplément aux informations historiques disponibles sur les tendances des dépenses sociales totales brutes, en tenant compte de l’impact qui varie selon le régime fiscal des différents pays. Le régime fiscal peut avoir une incidence sur les dépenses sociales de trois façons : Les gouvernements perçoivent des impôts directs et des cotisations de sécurité sociale sur les transferts en espèces. Les gouvernements perçoivent des impôts indirects sur les marchandises et les services achetés par les bénéficiaires. Les gouvernements peuvent accorder des déductions fiscales similaires à des prestations en espèces et/ou accorder des allégements fiscaux dans le but d’inciter les agents (instituts et/ou individus) privés à avoir recours aux ...
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.111 | 0.071 |
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".