Persistence in Infant Mortality: Evidence for the Indian States* Running Title: Persistence in Infant Mortality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Correspondence to both authors. * We acknowledge financial support from the ESRC under Research Grant RES-000-22-0651 and would like to thank ORC Macro International for providing us with the data. We are grateful to John Simons, Arthur van Soest, Mike Veall and three anonymous referees for many helpful comments. The paper has benefited from presentation at the Universities of Toronto, McMaster, Tilburg, Essex and Southampton, the ESRC Econometric Study Group Meeting and at an international workshop we organised at the University of Bristol on Child Health in Developing Countries. We are grateful to DFID-UK for funding the workshop. This paper investigates the high correlation in infant mortality across siblings using micro-data for India. In thirteen of fifteen states, we identify a causal effect of infant death on the risk of infant death of the subsequent sibling (a scarring effect), after controlling for mother- level heterogeneity. The scarring effects are large, the only other covariate with a similarly large effect being mother’s (secondary or higher) education. The two states in which evidence of scarring is weak are Punjab, the richest, and Kerala,
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".