Dynamics of Economic Well-Being: Spells of Unemployment, 2004–2007 Household Economic Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The U.S. labor market is dynamic and flexible—constantly changing as people enter it, leave it, or change status within it. This report, which looks at the incidence and length of spells of unemployment among various demographic groups, provides insights into the efficiency of the labor market in responding to shifts in the economy and in the society at large. This report uses longitudinal data from the 2004 panel of the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP) on how often and how long individuals in the United States were unemployed during the 4-year period of January 2004 to December 2007. 1, 2 It updates and adds to the topics presented in the previous report from the SIPP on this subject, which was based on the 2001 SIPP panel and covered the period from January 2001 to December 2003 (Gottschalck, 2006). This new report contains comparisons of data on spell duration from the 2004 SIPP panel with data from the previous report. The tables in Appendix A display the detailed statistical data underlying the analysis. The insights offered by the data in this report are framed within the particular economic and social conditions that marked the years 2004 through 2007.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".