MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304172527 · doi:10.3390/su141912677

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Situation of the Unemployed in Poland. A Study Using Survival Analysis Methods

2022· article· en· W4304172527 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Beata Bieszk‐Stolorz, Iwona Markowicz

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCOVID-19 Pandemic Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnemploymentPandemicWork (physics)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Quarter (Canadian coin)Duration (music)Demographic economicsEconomicsLabour supplyLabour economicsBusinessEconomic growthEngineeringGeographyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many studies point to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the socio-economic situation of countries and, consequently, on the achievement of sustainable development goals. Although termed a health crisis, the pandemic has also had an impact on the labour market. The imposed restrictions caused companies to close or reduce their operations. Employees switched to remote work, but also often lost their jobs temporarily or permanently. However, the impact of the pandemic on the labour market is not so obvious. This is indicated by our research and that of other researchers. In this paper, we used individual data on the unemployed registered at the labour office in Szczecin (Poland) and were thus able to apply survival analysis methods. These methods allowed us to assess changes in the duration of unemployment and the intensity of taking up work for individual cohorts (unemployed people deregistered in a given quarter). The results indicate, on the one hand, the problems in the labour market during the pandemic and, on the other hand, the adapted reaction of the unemployed to the situation and the acceleration of the decision to accept an offered job.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.412
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicCOVID-19 Pandemic ImpactsFrench-language works237,207