Awakening to the Intergenerational Equity Debate in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An earlier study revealed that conflict over the issue of intergenerational equity (referring to equality in treatment for different generations) was apparent in the US media during the 1980s and early 1990s while attention to this issue was virtually non-existent in Canada. The focus for discussions on this issue is the distribution of the economic costs of an aging population. Specifically, with an aging population, the growth in elderly dependents is a significant concern for countries with pay-as-you-go public pension systems. This research analyzes public discussion of the intergenerational equity issue from 1993 to 1998 through content analysis of print media. The number of articles on this issue grew and peaked in 1996 with a sharp decline in 1997 and 1998. The issue of intergenerational equity surfaced in Canada during the mid-1990s with the fear that the Canada Pension Plan might run dry during the 2010s under then-current contribution rates. The pension issue serves as a flashpoint for recent concerns of intergenerational equity in Canada.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".