MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7051743893

The Perfect Storm: Living on Universal Credit during the Cost of Living Crisis

2022· other· en· W7051743893 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSanctionsFalling (accident)Social securityCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Cost of livingGovernment (linguistics)Standard of livingQuarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last few years have been extraordinarily tough. The pandemic left 1.8 million people in Scotland financially worse off, and even before the most recent increase in the energy price cap one in three people found their bills unaffordable. Now people are faced with a perfect storm of soaring prices and flat or falling incomes, which risks sweeping tens of thousands of people across the country into poverty, problem debt, and destitution. \n \nThose relying on the social security system are particularly vulnerable to poverty. Just over 447,500 people across Scotland are on UC – equivalent to more than one in ten working age adults in Scotland and almost double the number before the pandemic. Getting social security right is vital to help these people weather the storm. \n \nRecent data from across the Citizens Advice network in Scotland shows the hardship people are facing every day: \n \nAdvice need for food banks has grown by almost a third (31%) since September 2021. \nAdvice need for other charitable support, including fuel bank referrals, saw a sharp increase of 23% between September 2021 and December 2021, likely reflecting the additional pressure of winter heating bills. \nAdvice on UC sanctions has grown by 53% over 2021-22. \nAdvice on UC Budgeting Advances has risen by 25% over 2021-22. \nAdvice on UC Overpayments nearly doubled from the average across 2020/21 to Q4 of 2021/22. \n \nBehind each of these statistics are real people. In this report we highlight four real Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) client stories which show the incredible difficulties many people on UC are facing daily. Their names have been changed to protect their anonymity, but their stories demonstrate the reality of the cost of living crisis and the need for further support.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.004
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0050.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.006

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam)Same topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207