Bibliographic record
Abstract
When evaluating a pension arrangement one must account for the risks to that arrangement. This study does this for the Canada Pension Plan. To do so we estimate the fair value and private cost structure contribution rates. The fair value rate is the actuarially fair contribution rate consistent with the CPP’s risk characteristics. The private cost structure rate is the rate that a fully-funded CPP would need to charge if it faced the administrative and adverse selection costs of private annuity providers. Estimated fair value rates range between 8 and 9 per cent, depending on assumed plan risk and equilibrium default-free returns. This range is lower than the statutory rate of 9.9 per cent and the sustainable rate of 9.8 per cent that ensures long-run asset-expenditure ratio sustainability. The sustainable rate is above the fair value rate because the CPP faces an unfunded liability cost as long as default-free returns exceed the expected growth of contributory earnings. Private cost rates range from 11 to 12 per cent and are above the fair value rate because of high private administrative cost and adverse selection costs that affect private annuity markets. Private cost rates are higher than the sustainable rate because private adverse selection and administrative costs exceed the CPP unfunded liability cost. 3
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 | 0.004 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.617 | 0.365 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".