MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198229434

A Proteção social ao segmento idoso no contexto de crise do capital: a realidade do Brasil e da Espanha

2019· article· pt· W3198229434 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andréia Aparecida Reis de Carvalho Liporoni, Núria Cordero Ramosa

Bibliographic record

VenueService social · 2019
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldMedicine
TopicAging, Health, and Disability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationContext (archaeology)Capital (architecture)Social securityPopulationPolitical scienceSocial capitalDeveloping countryEconomic growthDevelopment economicsEconomic policyEconomicsGeographySociologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study is to reflect on the social protection to the elderly section in the context of capital crisis, with reference to Brazil and Spain. The study was carried out through a bibliographical and documentary study, data from the United Nations, Brazilian and Spanish legislation. Projections by the United Nations indicate that in the year 2060, 27.3% of the population of developed countries will exceed 65 years, 16.8% in developing countries and indicate that the evolution of aging is different in developed and developing countries. The laws of both countries determine social protection from public policies, programs and social projects already implemented. However, it is not always what is determined in legislation if it is implemented in everyday practice and it is from the question about how the countries are preparing for the constant growth of this segment of the population. It is observed that the scenario is not promising, because in the face of the crisis of capital, monopoly capital seeks new niches for its maintenance and governments resort to measures and budget cuts to fit the financial system, through changes in legislation and of fiscal adjustment measures: flexibilization of labor relations, precariousness of social rights, among them the social security system, reviewing criteria and financing in a neoliberal tendency of fiscal adjustment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.322 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueService socialSame topicAging, Health, and DisabilityFrench-language works237,207