Les enfants se portent-ils bien ? Mobilite intergenerationnelle et bien-etre de l'enfant au Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'article examine le cadre conceptuel de la mobilite intergenerationnelle en regard de la relation entre les revenus des parents et ceux des enfants ainsi que le degre et les sources de la mobilite intergenerationnelle au Canada. La principale conclusion est la suivante : la societe canadienne se caracterise par un degre relativement eleve de mobilite intergenerationnelle et, selon l'information disponible, les enfants qui grandissent dans une famille a faible revenu ne sont pas condamnes a toucher de faibles revenus a l'age adulte. A cet egard, le Canada se compare avantageusement a bon nombre d'autres pays, la mobilite y etant en moyenne plus elevee qu'aux Etats-Unis et qu'au Royaume-Uni et similaire a celle observee dans certains des pays les mieux classes a ce chapitre. Les causes de ce phenomene se rapportent a l'acces a une education de grande qualite et aux investissements non monetaires de grande qualite dans les enfants. Cependant, aucun element probant ne permet de lier le niveau du revenu familial et la nature de ces investissements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".