MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4364863804 · doi:10.46692/9781447326137.074

A Citizen’s Income could work at different levels

2015· other· en· W4364863804 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policy and Reform Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Demographic economicsEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Citizen’s Income would certainly work at the level of the nation state. In federal states it could work at the level below the nation state: for instance, at provincial level in Canada, or at state level in the USA. All that would be required for a subnational Citizen’s Income would be a robust list of citizens resident at the subnational level. In such semi-federal nation states as the United Kingdom, existing experience of devolved government suggests that a Citizen’s Income could work in each of England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Again, all that would be required would be complete and accurate lists of citizens resident in each of them. Scotland recently made use of such a list to hold its referendum on independence. Whether a Citizen’s Income could be administered at more local levels is an interesting question. Individuals and households move frequently within the countries in which they live, and within the states and provinces of federated states. The UK’s new locally regulated means-tested property tax rebate, Council Tax Support, suggests that means-tested benefits can be managed differently in different locations, so we should expect Citizen’s Income administrations to be able to keep track of who was living where. But adjusting personal tax allowances only in those localities in which a Citizen’s Income was in payment could be too much to ask. Local Citizen’s Income schemes are probably not on the agenda for developed economies. Local pilot projects in India and Namibia have shown that it is possible to administer temporary Citizen’s Incomes at the local level in developing countries, but those local experiments were plagued by migration into the pilot communities, so permanent local schemes would probably not be viable. Countries in the European Union already have free markets in labour, goods and services, and countries in other regions of the world are moving in this direction. A Citizen’s Income at bloc level would make a lot of sense. The really interesting question is whether a global Citizen’s Income would be possible. Why not? It could be funded by income tax collected within each country, or by regional or global carbon or financial transaction taxes. Such a Citizen’s Income could reduce poverty around the world, and therefore reduce both armed conflicts and migration flows. Everyone would benefit.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0500.027

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 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 topicSocial Policy and Reform Studies→French-language works237,207→