MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1595744403

Inter-CMA Migration of the Immigrants in Canada: 1991-1996 and 1996-2001

2007· preprint· en· W1595744403 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lei Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2007
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Labor Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationDemographic economicsIncentiveBiological dispersalEthnic groupGeographyInternal migrationEconomic geographyDemographyPolitical scienceSociologyEconomicsPopulation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on the tabulations of the IMDB, I characterized, explained and compared the 1991-1996 and 1996-2001 inter-CMA migration of the immigrants in Canada. The spatial and temporal patterns were consistent with the neoclassical economic theory and the ethnic enclave theory. In making their decisions on departure and destination choices, the immigrants (both the 1991 landing cohort and 1996 cohort) were responsive to income and employment incentives, as well as the retaining and attracting powers of ethnic communities. This research also discovered an interesting temporal pattern -- while the inter-CMA migration of immigrants accentuated the over representation of the immigrants in Toronto and Vancouver in the 91-96 period, the rise of the “secondary” CMAs led to a spatial dispersal of the immigrants in the 96-01 period. This “new” finding supplements the existing literature on internal migration of Canadian immigrants, which discovered little evidence of an increased dispersion of immigrants over time.

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)0.001
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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.011
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics→Same topicMigration and Labor Dynamics→French-language works237,207→