MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7067168034

Labor Market Behavior Differences between the Young and Old in a Search Theoretical Model

2024· article· en· W7067168034 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnemploymentProductivityGreat recessionShock (circulatory)Youth unemploymentUnemployment rateDiscouraged worker
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the labor market behavior differences across different age groups in Canada. I use data from 2000 to 2024, which includes the Great Recession and the Covid-19 recession, to conduct analysis. The data show that compared to the older workers, young workers not only have a much higher unemployment rate, but also a higher job finding rate and job separation rate. The volatilities in the unemployment and separation rates for the young workers are also much higher than those for the older workers. I then use a labor search model to study the differences. I calibrate the model to the Canadian data and simulate the model assuming the economy is subject to a productivity shock. I find that there are significant labor market differences between young workers and older workers: In particular, the response in the unemployment rate of the young workers to the shock is much more pronounced compared to the older age groups. I also find that the labor market differences between young and old workers are mainly caused by the differences in the job finding rate.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor)→Same topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality→French-language works237,207→