MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7101090762

Presented at Retirement Implications of Demographic and Family Change Symposium Sponsored by the Society of Actuaries

2002· article· en· W7101090762 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatisticDependency ratioBustIndex (typography)Consumption (sociology)Baby boom
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the relationship between the Wealth Transfer Index (WTI), a statistic defined by Brown and Bilodeau (1999), and retirement age, which is the age at which the workers in an economy cease to be economically productive. Appropriately expressed as ratio of consumption demand to labor productivity, the WTI is a barometer for the demand for wealth placed on the workers of an economy. This paper explains why a relationship between this statistic and retirement age must exist. Using Canadian historical median retirement age data compiled by Statistics Canada and calculated values of the WTI for the same period, three linear regression models are fitted. The conclusion from this analysis is that there is a strong positive correlation between the WTI and average retirement age. This paper also briefly looks at the well-documented demographic shift expected to occur in Canada because of the baby boom-baby bust tidal wave. The aged dependency ratio is expected to increase dramatically, reaching 45 % in

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0740.008

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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.152 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207