MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095124116

The Identification of Fixed Costs from Consumer Behaviour

2005· article· en· W7095124116 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquivalence (formal languages)Subsistence agricultureFixed costConsumer expenditureIdentification (biology)Class (philosophy)Consumer Expenditure Survey
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some household expenditures, such as those for subsistence or basic needs, are fixed. Using the methodology of equivalence scales, we develop a model in which differences in fixed costs of characteristics across households can be identified from household behaviour. Equivalent expenditure for a household is the expenditure needed to bring a reference household, such as a single childless adult, to the level of well-being of household members. The equivalence scale for the household is the ratio of expenditure to equivalent expenditure. Only two types of equivalent-expenditure functions are used in practice: those in which the ratio of household expenditure and equivalent expenditure is independent of expenditure, and those in which their difference is independent of expenditure. We propose a class of equivalent-expenditure functions that allows for differences in fixed costs and generalizes both relationships. Using Canadian consumer-demand micro-data, we estimate equivalent-expenditure func-tions and equivalence scales. We find that, for large households, fixed costs of characteristics are large and positive, resulting in equivalence scales that decline with expenditure.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.149
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207