MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4250697257 · doi:10.5604/01.3001.0015.0618

ESTIMATES OF SOCIAL MINIMUM BASKETS FOR THE FOURTH QUARTER OF 2020

2021· article· en· W4250697257 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Piotr Kurowski

Bibliographic record

VenuePolityka Społeczna · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Socio-Economic Development Trends
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Inflation (cosmology)Falling (accident)Consumption (sociology)Value (mathematics)Rose (mathematics)EconomicsAgricultural economicsDemographic economicsGeographyStatisticsSociologyMathematicsSocial sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article presents values of social minimum baskets for the fourth quarter of 2020. The presented estimates take into account the needs as foreseen in the model under normal conditions – the new circumstances of COVID-19 are 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. After a seasonal decline in in the third quarter, the fourth quarter brought a gentle increase in the value of the social minimum baskets. Compared to the previous survey, the social minimum rose by 0.1% in a household of two pensioners to 0.5% in a household of five with three children. Inflation rose by 0.4% during this period. The increase in the social minimum was mainly due to the higher cost of housing – it rose from 1% to 1.2%, with the value of the food basket falling from 0.5% to 0.7%.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.291 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolityka SpołecznaSame topicRegional Socio-Economic Development TrendsFrench-language works237,207