MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312197051 · doi:10.3386/w30790

The Insurance Implications of Government Student Loan Repayment Schemes

2022· report· en· W4312197051 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Martin Gervais, Qian Liu, Lance Lochner

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2022
Typereport
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityMcMaster UniversityStatistics CanadaWestern University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsStudent loanGovernment (linguistics)BusinessLoanActuarial scienceFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We use new administrative data that links detailed information on Canadian student loan recipients with their repayment and income histories from the Canada Student Loans Program (CSLP), income tax filings, and post-secondary schooling records to measure the extent to which student borrowers adjust loan repayments to insure against income variation. Several mechanisms are available for students to adjust loan repayments in response to income fluctuations: formal, like CSLP's Repayment Assistance Plan; and informal, such as delinquency or default. Borrowers can also make larger payments than required should they experience unexpectedly high income. Indeed, loan payments are shown to increase in income, more so in early years and for individuals with higher initial debt. More formally, we estimate that on average, an unexpected $1,000 change in year-over-year income is associated with a $30 change in loan payment: from a $50 change the year after graduation, declining to a $20 change 5 years after graduation. Loan repayments are also used to absorb income variation that is more permanent in nature: for borrowers whose income is consistently below or above expected income at graduation, the magnitude of average repayment adjustment is similar to the average yearly response.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.001
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.211
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic ResearchSame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207