MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1562323462

Visible Minority Neighbourhood Enclaves and Labour Market Outcomes of Immigrants

2003· preprint· en· W1562323462 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Feng Hou, Garnett Picot

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2003
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationCensusEarningsNeighbourhood (mathematics)GeographyDemographic economicsDemographyPopulationMinority groupEthnic groupPolitical scienceEconomicsSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using Census data from 1981, 1986, 1991 and 1996, this study examined the association between living in a visible minority enclave and immigrants' labour market outcomes in Canada's three largest cities. The results showed that the number of such enclaves, defined as census tracts with at least 30% of the population from a single visible minority group (Chinese, South Asian or Black), increased from 6 in 1981 to 142 in 1996, mostly in Toronto and Vancouver. The association between exposure to own-group neighbours and employment was at times negative, but generally not significant. Exposure to own-group neighbours and working in a segregated occupation was positively, but not significantly, associated. Little association existed between exposure and employment earnings. However, there were some important group differences. The associations between exposure to own-group neighbours and labour market outcomes were usually very weak among Chinese immigrants, but often negative and strong among Black immigrants.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.306 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicMigration, Ethnicity, and EconomyFrench-language works237,207