Factoring the cost of aged care into retirement planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: This paper addresses one of the information lacunae that employees face as they plan for their retirement, namely the likely aged care costs that they can expect to face in retirement. It derives lower bounds on the private aged care costs that several representative individuals can expect to face in retirement by estimating their lifetime risk of entry to permanent residential aged care, the most expensive form of aged care, and their expected length of stay in permanent residential aged care (given that they enter). Almost half (49.9 per cent) of women and a third (31.9 per cent) of men aged sixty-five will enter permanent residential aged care at sometime in their remaining life. Of those who do enter permanent residential aged care, women on average stay for 3.5 years while men on average stay for 2.3 years. The total private cost of residential care depends on a care recipient’s income and assets. For a part-pensioner with total income of $30,000 per annum and assessable assets of $160,000 who enters residential aged care, the total private cost would, on average, be $62,000 for a woman and $31,000 for a man. A quarter of part-pensioners with this level of income and assets who enter residential aged care would face a total private cost of more than $133,000
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 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".