MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395454068 · doi:10.5604/01.3001.0054.4948

SOCIAL MINIMUM LEVELS IN POLAND IN THE THIRD QUARTER OF 2023

2024· article· en· W4395454068 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Piotr Kurowski

Bibliographic record

VenuePolityka Społeczna · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)GeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article provides a summary of the social minimum estimates for the third quarter of 2023.Although modelled household spending still appears to be rising on an annual basis, on a quarterly basis it fell for the first time this year. In relation to the third quarter of 2022, the CPI stood at 9.7% (cf. GUS, 2023). During this time, the social minimum values increased from 9.7% in the household of two pensioners to 14.5% in the household of a single person of working age. Compared to the data from the previous survey (2nd quarter, 2023), with a negative CPI (-0.3%), the values of the social minimum also fell. The decrease was smallest in the pensioner household of a single person (-0.6%) and largest in households with dependent children (-1.1%). The reduction in the value of the social minimum during the period under review was most influenced by the fall in the value of the food basket. This was a result of the autumn reduction in prices, mainly of vegetables and fruit. The decline in the value of the social minimum was partly prevented by an increase in the model costs of housing and energy carriers. With a low CPI for this group (0.1%), these costs rose from 1.2% in 1-person households to 1.4% in 4- and 5-person households.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.387 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolityka SpołecznaSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207