MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386913232 · doi:10.1111/issr.12336

Pension financialization and collective risk sharing in Canada and Finland

2023· article· en· W4386913232 on OpenAlex
Jyri Liukko, Aaron Doyle, Turo‐Kimmo Lehtonen

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Social Security Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHousing, Finance, and Neoliberalism
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinancializationPensionAsset (computer security)EconomicsAsset allocationStatutory lawInvestment (military)Labour economicsEconomic policyFinancePolitical sciencePortfolioPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article contributes to the debate concerning pension financialization and how countries are adapting their pension systems to respond to demographic ageing. We do so by examining the statutory pension systems of Canada and Finland, which diverge interestingly from current international trends. The Canadian and Finnish public pension schemes reflect two tendencies often associated with pension financialization: an increasing reliance on financial markets and an investment policy with a diversified asset allocation. However, unlike in many other countries, this has not resulted in heightened individual risks in old‐age income security caused by a shift from defined benefit to defined contribution pensions – an otherwise common trend internationally.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.220 · 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