MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297514166 · doi:10.3138/cpp.2022-027

Inter-Jurisdictional Retirement in Canada

2022· article· en· W4297514166 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Derek Messacar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Public Policy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsStatistics CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisdictionDemographic economicsWork (physics)BusinessLabour economicsEconomicsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I provide the first look at inter-jurisdictional retirement in Canada, which refers to working in one jurisdiction but moving to another at retirement. Using administrative data from 1982 to 2018, I find that the likelihood of moving jurisdictions doubles at retirement, using an event-study design. This effect is driven by younger and higher-income tax filers who likely moved during their working years for high-paying jobs and could afford to retire earlier and move home. The Atlantic provinces and British Columbia are net recipients of inter-jurisdictional retirees, whereas all others are net donors. Hence, there is asymmetry between where people work and pay taxes before retirement and where they live after retirement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.142
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Public PolicySame topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207