A counting Multidimensional Poverty Index in public policy context : the case of Colombia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous multidimensional indicators adopted in Colombian, as the Unmet Basic Needs or the Living Conditions Index, lose their policy relevance and arguably have become poor instruments for poverty measurement. This paper presents the Colombian Multidimensional Poverty Index (CMPI), a synthetic indicator that overcomes the methodological problems that arose from previous multidimensional indices, and that has a broad public policy scope of use. The CMPI is based on the methodology of Alkire and Foster (2010); is composed of five dimensions (education of household members, childhood and youth conditions, health, employment and access to household utilities and living conditions); and uses a nested weighting structure, where each dimension is equally weighted, as is each indicator within each dimension. This paper proposes the CMPI to tracking multiple deprivations across the national territory, to monitor public policies by sector and to design poverty reduction goals, among other public policy uses. Analysis of the results demonstrates that multidimensional poverty in Colombia decreased between 1997 and 2010. Multidimensional poverty rates decreased in both urban and rural areas, but imbalances remain.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".