MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411454531 · doi:10.14419/2g9fpx44

Social Security Measures and Informal Sector in India: An Overview

2025· article· en· W4411454531 on OpenAlexaff
Dipankar Saha, M. Giribabu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInformal sectorBeneficiarySocial securityGovernment (linguistics)BusinessSocial sectorGovernment sectorPublic sectorSocial protectionEconomic growthEconomicsPublic economicsLabour economicsPrivate sectorFinanceEconomyMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Indian labour market is primarily informal, both historically and currently. The informal sector is often referred to as the 'unorganized sector', and individuals employed in this sector are commonly referred to as 'unorganized workers'. Over 90% of people in India's labour market were engaged in informal employment. This paper attempts to examine the existing labour laws, acts, and social security measures designed for marginal communities in the unorganized sector. Study findings suggested that measures have been successful efforts in terms of providing the integrated database for unorganized workers under the eShram initiative of the government of India. Although schemes provide social security, there has been inconsistency in the performance of the schemes. The study recommends that proper awareness of the scheme should be planned to reach the potential beneficiary, as well as a robust monitoring mechanism for the evaluation of the measures by adopting both top-down and bottom-up approaches.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.343 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Accounting and Economics StudiesSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207