MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414407978 · doi:10.1515/bis-2025-0003

Free Groceries for All: A Realistic Path Towards Universal Basic Income

2025· article· en· W4414407978 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueBasic Income Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIncome, Poverty, and Inequality
Canadian institutionsThe King's UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasic incomePurchasingPublic policyPath (computing)Public assistanceFree marketPoverty

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Economic insecurity is a major problem of the contemporary world. Universal Basic Income (UBI) has been widely advocated as a potentially powerful antidote; however, it remains relatively unpopular because much of the public believes that it disincentivizes work, immorally provides something for nothing, will be spent on drugs and alcohol, and/or is too expensive. Rather than developing yet another academic response to these worries, this paper attempts to design a UBI-type policy that could be highly popular right now, and therefore realistically implemented in the short-term. The policy of Free Groceries for All would entitle each and every citizen to a small amount of money every month, say $50, via an electronic card that can be used for purchasing food and only food. The evidence from the survey data suggests that this policy would be significantly more appealing to the public at large than a conventional UBI, since it substantially mitigates the major concerns.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.302 · 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