MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417511728 · doi:10.61384/r.c.a..v5i4.1585

El Impacto del Salario Mínimo Real en la Pobreza Laboral en México: en Análisis Econométrico con Arima (2018-2024)

2025· article· W4417511728 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A Lucio, Eduardo Rodríguez Juárez

Bibliographic record

VenueEstudios y Perspectivas Revista Científica y Académica · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Labor and Employment Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationPovertyResearch methodologyQuarter (Canadian coin)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El presente artículo analiza el impacto del salario mínimo real sobre la pobreza laboral en México (2018–2024) mediante un modelo econométrico ARIMAX, utilizando el Índice de Tendencia Laboral de la Pobreza (ITLP) como variable dependiente, incorporando la inflación de alimentos y una intervención por la disrupción en el segundo trimestre del año 2020. El modelo de mejor ajuste utiliza por niveles el salario mínimo real (índice base 2018=100) con residuos que no muestran autocorrelación. Los resultados estimados indican un efecto inverso del salario real sobre el Índice de Tendencia Laboral de la Pobreza (ITLP), mientras que el efecto contemporáneo de la inflación en alimentos no resulta concluyente. El choque exógeno de la pandemia domina la dinámica a corto plazo. Se aplican pruebas de robustez para la validación del modelo, destacando la preferencia por la especificación en niveles. Con ello, la evidencia muestra que de manera gradual las trayectorias sostenidas del salario mínimo real contribuyen a contener la pobreza laboral

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.198
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.301 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEstudios y Perspectivas Revista Científica y AcadémicaSame topicInternational Labor and Employment LawFrench-language works237,207