MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Does Population Aging Affect Income Inequality?

2021· book-chapter· en· W3169327512 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gürçem ÖZAYTÜRK, Ali Eren Alper, Fındık Özlem Alper

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in human services and public health (AHSPH) book series · 2021
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDependency ratioCointegrationEconomicsDemographic economicsInequalityEconomic inequalityPensionDependency (UML)PopulationLabour economicsDemographyEconometricsSociologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyzes the relationship between the elderly dependency ratio and income inequality over the period 1972-2019 in countries such as the USA, Japan, the UK, France, Germany, Canada, and Italy, which rank top in the population aging, using the Fourier-Shin cointegration test. According to the results, the rise in the elderly dependency ratio of all countries included in the analysis, except for France, has a positive impact on income inequality. The result implying that the rise in the elderly dependency ratio increases the income inequality and renders some policy recommendations possible. Accordingly, the provision of adequate childcare programs and family aids can result in greater labor force participation in the short- and long-run. In addition, a pension system can be developed to lower the elderly dependency ratio, more money can be saved for the retirement period, and working domains can be developed for the post-retirement period.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.376 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in human services and public health (AHSPH) book seriesSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207