ESTIMATES OF SOCIAL MINIMUM BASKETS FOR THE SECOND AND THIRD QUARTER OF 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article presents estimates of social minimum baskets for the second and third quarter of 2020, i.e. when the sanitary restrictions resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic took place. They obviously affected the functioning of households in various aspects. The presented estimates take into account the needs as foreseen in the model under normal conditions; the new circumstances of Covid-19 were not taken into account. There is lack of research data on changes in household consumption in 2020. If there will be a need to change assumptions in the model, the values of social minimum can be recalculated in the future. The value of the social minimum in the 2nd quarter increased by 2.1% in a one-person household and by 1.8% in a four -person household, with inflation by 0.3%.The increase in the subsistence minimum was mainly due to a further increase in food prices (from 4.3 to 4.5%), with the costs of housing and energy carriers rising from 1.7 to 2.0%. The very same factor contributed to a decline in the value of the minimum in the third quarter. In this period, the social minimum estimates decreased by -1% in a one-person household and by -1.1% in a four-person household, with a trace increase in CPI index (+0.1%). Seasonal decreases in food prices caused the value of food in the basket to decrease from -6.1 to -6.4%, with a CPI of -2.3% in this expenditure group. This time, expenditure on housing and energy products did not exceed 0.5%
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".