MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4317748149 · doi:10.55016/ojs/sppp.v8i1.42503

ESPlannerBASIC CANADA

2015· article· en· W4317748149 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laurence J. Kotlikoff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe School of Public Policy Publications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional financial planning is based on a fundamental rule of thumb: Aim to save enough for retirement to replace 80 per cent of your pre-retirement income with income from pensions and assets. Millions of Canadians follow this formula. Yet, there is no guarantee this approach is consistent with a savings plan that will allow them to experience their optimal standard of living — given their income — throughout their working lives. Consumption smoothing happens when a consumer projects her income and her non-discretionary expenses (such as mortgage payments) all the way up until the end of her life, and is able to determine her household discretionary spending power over time, to achieve the smoothest living standard path possible without going into debt. When consumption smoothing is calculated accurately, a person’s lifestyle should be roughly the same whether she is in her 30s with small children, in her 50s with kids in college, or in retirement, with adult children. Consumption smoothing allows that to happen. But while it is conceptually straightforward, consumption smoothing requires the use of advanced numerical techniques. Now, Canadian families have access to a powerful consumption-smoothing tool: ESPlannerBASIC Canada. This free, secure and confidential online tool will allow Canadian families to safely and securely enter their earnings and other financial resources and will calculate for them how much they can spend and how much they should save in order to maintain their lifestyle from now until they die, without going into debt. It will also calculate how much life insurance they should buy, to ensure that household living standards are not affected after a family member dies. Users can easily and instantly run “what-if” scenarios to see how retiring early (or later), changing jobs, adjusting retirement contributions, having children, moving homes, timing RRSP withdrawals, and other financial and lifestyle decisions would affect their sustainable living standards. ESPlannerBASIC Canada can also be used to understand how families should adjust their saving-and-spending behaviour when there are changes to tax rates and other fiscal policies. When used properly, ESPlannerBASIC Canada gives Canadian families the power to plan the lifestyle they want, based on what they can actually afford, without going into debt, or saving too little — or even too much — for 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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.7840.452

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe School of Public Policy PublicationsSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207